    <rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
     <channel>
        <title>ACCU  :: A Standard Individual: A Licensed Engineer</title>
        <link>https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/322</link>
        <description>Professionalism in Programming</description>
        <dc:language>en-us</dc:language> 
        <dc:creator>Administrator</dc:creator> 
        <admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://www.xaraya.org" /> 
        <admin:errorReportsTo rdf:resource="mailto:webeditor@accu.org" />
       <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
       <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
       <docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>




<div class="xar-mod-head"><span class="xar-mod-title">Project Management + Overload Journal #58 - Dec 2003</span></div>

<table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0">
    <tbody>
    <tr>
        <td valign="top">
            Browse in :
       </td>
       <td valign="top">

                                            <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/">All</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c13/">Topics</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c66/">Management</a>
<br />

                                            <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/">All</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c76/">Journals</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c78/">Overload</a>

                     &gt;                         <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c154/">58</a>
<br />

                                            <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c66-154/">Any of these categories</a>

                    -                        <a href="https://members.accu.org/index.php/articles/c66+154/">All of these categories</a>
<br />
</td>
   </tr>
   </tbody>
</table>




<div class="xar-error">
   <p>
 <strong>Note:</strong> when you create a new publication type,
the articles module will automatically use the templates
<em>user-display-[publicationtype].xt</em>
and <em>user-summary-[publicationtype].xt</em>.
If those templates do not exist when you try to preview or display a new article,
you'll get this warning :-)  Please place your own templates in themes/<em>yourtheme</em>/modules/articles . The templates will get the extension .xt there. </p>
</div>
<div class="xar-norm xar-standard-box-padding">
   <h1><strong>Title:</strong>&nbsp;A Standard Individual: A Licensed Engineer</h1>
<p><strong>Author:</strong>&nbsp;</p>
<p>
<strong>Date:</strong> 02 December 2003 21:55:55 +00:00 or Tue, 02 December 2003 21:55:55 +00:00</p>
<p><strong>Summary:</strong>&nbsp;</p>
<p><strong>Body:</strong>&nbsp;<div class="sect1" lang="en">
<div class="titlepage">
<h2><a name="d0e24" id="d0e24"></a></h2>
</div>
<p>Are you an Engineer? Pause and think before you answer.</p>
<p>Recently I saw one of those TV programs about changing houses.
The couple were introduced: She was a &quot;nursing assistant&quot; and he
was an &quot;engineer&quot;. In fact he was a mechanic. Now, can you imagine
the outcry had she been described as a Doctor? Several professional
bodies and individual doctors would have complained before the
program had got to the commercial break.</p>
<p>Today as I am editing this I am waiting for the &quot;service
engineer&quot; to swap out the dishwasher. They assure me he is a &quot;fully
trained and qualified engineer&quot;. Last time he was here he plugged
in a laptop to the dishwasher and set it running. He told me he had
started City &amp; Guilds Part 1 but had given up. The laptop then
told him the control board needed replacing... It seems that any
one can be &quot;an engineer&quot;.</p>
<p>In the software industry I have seen people who have taken a
short programming course and become &quot;software engineers&quot;. Now, you
try taking your degree in electronics or software and doing an
&quot;architectural appreciation course&quot; and calling yourself an
Architect... or a six-month first aid course and call yourself a
[Medical] Doctor. There are laws against this but you will have to
be a barrister to defend yourself in court. This is because it has
been deemed dangerous to have unqualified people as Architects,
Lawyers, Doctors, Civil (structural) Engineers, Gas Fitters etc.
However, there is no virtually no restriction on embedded engineers
no matter how safety critical the work.</p>
<p>My central heating fitter has to be CORGI registered before he
can fit a cooker, fire or boiler. This involves passing and
regularly re-passing legally mandated, and expensive, exams to be
able to fit these appliances. Although many of these cookers and
heating systems are microprocessor controlled there is no
requirement for the programmer to have any form of qualification at
all.</p>
<p>The options for some sort of registration, certification or
licensing for engineers have been looked at and legislation
attempted several times over the last century, from statutory and
mandatory licensing in various forms to a purely voluntary system.
Strangely, for various reasons, in the past it is the Engineering
Institutions that have objected to mandatory systems. Some of the
major points are:</p>
<div class="variablelist">
<dl>
<dt><span class="term">1886:</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>The Architects and Engineers Bill was defeated. This was lobbied
against by the Institute of Civil Engineers, I.Mech.E. and the IEE.
It was at this point the Worshipful Company of Plumbers started the
register of plumbers, but this was voluntary.</p>
</dd>
<dt><span class="term">1919/1920:</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>The Institute of Civil Engineers had come round to thinking it
was a good idea to have a statutory register of Engineers but again
this was vetoed by the other Engineering Institutes.</p>
</dd>
<dt><span class="term">1926:</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>Another Engineers Bill for Statutory Registration of Engineers
was vetoed by the Civils, Mechanicals and IEE. The reason being
that the Institutes felt that they should be the judges of
standards not the government.</p>
</dd>
<dt><span class="term">1943:</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>Again the Government was persuaded not to implement a Register
of Engineers qualified to work on public contracts.</p>
</dd>
<dt><span class="term">1980:</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>The Finnison Report lead to the creation of the Engineering
Council and protection for titles Chartered Engineer, Incorporated
Engineer and Engineering Technician. Unfortunately the term
&quot;Engineer&quot; was not included. The Royal Charter protects these
titles with Civil Law. Note this was set up by the Government not
the institutes.</p>
</dd>
<dt><span class="term">1993/4:</span></dt>
<dd>
<p>A veritable library of reports and papers turned up at this
point: &quot;Engineering into the Millenium&quot; (Eng Council Steering
Group), &quot;The Statutory Question&quot; (Porter), &quot;Report of Licensing of
Competent Persons&quot; Working Group, &quot;The UK Engineering Profession:
The Case for Unification&quot; (Millman), &quot;Engineers and Professional
Self Regulation&quot; (Jordan) and others. Note I will dig out URLs for
these as I can. They will be added to the version on <a href=
"http://www.phaedsys.org" target=
"_top">http://www.phaedsys.org</a></p>
</dd>
</dl>
</div>
<p>Interestingly these preceding cases all seem to be connected in
time with major upheavals and wars. 1886 was the middle of the
rapid expansion of British interests in Africa, 1919/20 was the end
of WW1, 1926 the General Strike and nationalisation, 1943 WW2 and
1980 was the middle of the Thatcher era, free market and high
unemployment. In the early 1990's I recall that we had a recession
that no one talked about. I am not suggesting a conspiracy! Just
looking at the factors.</p>
<p>That brings us up to the present. There have been another flurry
of reports mainly in the last two years. These have culminated in
the report of May 2003: &quot;Licensing and the UK Engineering
Profession&quot; for the Engineering and Technology Board. You can judge
for yourself what the major upheaval behind this new interest in
licensing is.</p>
<p>I will hazard a guess at the renewed interest. At this point my
employer (<a href="http://www.hitex.co.uk" target=
"_top">http://www.hitex.co.uk</a>) would like me to point out these
are my personal views and I am not legally qualified! As with last
month's item on Corporate Manslaughter, it is sadly not the
professional bodies but the insurance companies who are likely to
be (indirectly) behind the changes. Product liability. Money talks.
Corporate Manslaughter comes into the report &quot;Licensing and the UK
Engineering Profession&quot;. Engineering, especially software and
embedded systems are playing a larger part in our lives. With the
pace of modern life there is more scope for causing more &quot;insured
casualties&quot;. Perhaps I am just a cynic.</p>
<p>The other problem is partly what are you actually trying to
license, certify or register? It ranges from the CORGI type system
for gas fitters where there is a legal requirement to pass and
continually re-pass exams before one can work, through to a
voluntary register such as C.Eng via one of the Institutes, the IEE
for example (<a href="http://www.iee.org" target=
"_top">http://www.iee.org</a>). C.Eng is a one off assessment with
no reassessment. As long as I pay the dues to the IEE and
Engineering Council I remain Chartered.</p>
<p>If you think the C.Eng requirements are difficult gas fitters
have to re-take the exams every five years for each category of
work the undertake: cookers, fires etc. This can cost up to
&pound;5000! In other words &pound;1000 a year. This gives them a
card that shows the categories of work they can undertake. It is
illegal for anyone to work on gas equipment for gain unless they
are CORGI registered. It has been noted recently that the high
costs are proving to be creating problems with the legitimate
fitters. It is leading to some non-registered working. This is of
course illegal which is the get out for the insurance companies...
The claim is void if you used illegal fitters. I am getting cynical
again! There is an HSE paper on where the gas competencies are
going at <a href="http://www.hse.gov.uk/gas/wg3/wg3_co2.pdf"
target="_top">http://www.hse.gov.uk/gas/wg3/wg3_co2.pdf</a> or you
can look at <a href="http://www.corgi-gas.co.uk" target=
"_top">http://www.corgi-gas.co.uk</a>. You could also ring up my
local CORGI registered gas fitter/central heating expert and ask
him about CORGI but you had better be prepared for some strong
language!! It's not the regulation so much as the cost.</p>
<p>However for the professions the UK is one of the least regulated
countries in Europe. As you would expect Germany and Austria lead
the way for Engineers along with Italy and Luxembourg. Most of the
others fit in between. Strangely, Scandinavia, home of some well
known engineering excellence is also low on regulation for
Engineering. However, when it comes to Accountants, Architects,
Lawyers or Pharmacists they are right up with the rest, again the
UK is trailing behind. There is a study that explores the
regulation of professional Engineers in Europe at <a href=
"http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/competion/publications/publications"
target=
"_top">http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/competion/publications/publications</a>.</p>
<p>There has been an attempt to harmonise the engineering
professions across Europe with the Eur Ing (European Engineer)
Register run by the European Engineering Federation FEANI (<a href=
"http://www.FEANI.org" target="_top">http://www.FEANI.org</a>).
This is currently voluntary in the UK and is open to Chartered
Engineers. Whilst it is currently little used in the UK it will
become more important as time goes on especially if you work with
European companies. There is a study on where it is expected to go
at <a href="http://www.upf.es/dcpis/esf/papers/2bcn.doc" target=
"_top">http://www.upf.es/dcpis/esf/papers/2bcn.doc</a>. I recommend
that all Chartered Engineers should ask their professional
Institute for the forms and join the FEANI register. The forms are
relatively simple and the C.Eng means you are already at the
required level. Also it is inexpensive, I think it is &pound;35 for
5 years registration.</p>
<p>Recently in the USA there have been moves to certify and/or
license Engineers to practice. In June 1998 Texas established
Software Engineering as a recognised and licensed profession. You
get the right to call yourself an Engineer and can offer software
engineering services for gain. This is for any software for
&quot;engineered systems including embedded systems, real-time systems,
mechanical devices, electrical devices and power systems&quot;. The
requirements are a suitable degree, 16 years experience and
references from 9 people 5 of which must be Licensed Engineers.
Interestingly the following year in 1999 the ACM decided that it
was opposed to licensing. This was for a variety of reasons. The
report is at <a href=
"http://www.acm.org/serving/se_policy/report.html" target=
"_top">http://www.acm.org/serving/se_policy/report.html</a>.</p>
<p>Several other US states and Canadian provinces are following the
lead from Texas. Also in Australia there is a similar &quot;Professional
Engineer&quot; or PE title. These are at the level of you must be
registered before you can practice for gain. IE on license you cant
write SW and get paid for it.</p>
<p>Many of the studies have looked at what it is they want to
certify or licence. There have been studies on the impact on the
costs to the Engineer, the companies using them, administering the
schemes and the economy in general. Also how it will affect the
industry as with the gas fitters, railway signalling and aircraft
maintenance. The ideas range from (as now with C.Eng.) when you get
a suitable qualification and a minimum amount of experience you are
registered, through being required to do so much training (the
Continuing Professional Development scheme), and on to annual
re-testing. The IEE and BCS both looked at running CPD schemes and
tried them for some years. They modified them and they seemed to
disappear.</p>
<p>Whilst the specific requirement will vary from profession to
profession many of these studies call for a unified &quot;Professional
Engineer&quot; status. This was partly realised by the Engineering
Council having the Engineering Institutes as members and overseeing
the Chartered Engineer. The proposed merger of the IEE, IMechE and
IIE will make this idea even easier to implement a general
Professional Engineer status.</p>
<p>That said, various industries are already expanding their
licensing. For example The UK Civil Aviation Authority licences
pilots, air traffic control and maintenance engineers. Since 2001
(remember 2001 was the start of the current flurry of licensing
reports) this has been via the JAR-66 and JAR-145. The JAR or Joint
Aviation Requirement is world wide and is expected to widen its
remit to encompass more of the smaller light aircraft that are
currently not covered. They are regulated by Maximum Takeoff Mass.
See <a href="http://www.caa.co.uk" target=
"_top">http://www.caa.co.uk</a> and <a href="http://www.jaa.nl"
target="_top">http://www.jaa.nl</a> for the licensing regulations.
These licences require (for some levels) Chartered Engineer status
and the reports are proposing mandatory amounts of CPD or training
that must be undertaken each year. Information on this at <a href=
"http://www.sbac.co.uk/files/newsdocs/84/Interim%20Report%20final.pdf"
target=
"_top">http://www.sbac.co.uk/files/newsdocs/84/Interim%20Report%20final.pdf</a>.</p>
<p>The Institution of Railway Signal engineers (<a href=
"http://www.irse.org" target="_top">http://www.irse.org</a>) have
operated a licensing system since 1993... That's another of the
dates when licensing came to the fore. They have many categories of
licensing that require CPD and retesting at regular intervals.</p>
<p>The US proposals suggest that only 20% of their IT/software
people will be able to gain the licensing for the safety critical
work. I have heard a similar figure of 20% Chartered and 80%
Incorporated Engineers mentioned by a member of the Engineering
Council for the UK.</p>
<p>However it finally ends up, licensing for Professional Software
and Embedded Engineers is going to happen in the UK. Across the
world and in some sectors within the UK these schemes for
registering, certifying or licensing professional Engineers are
being strengthened and expanded. The UK will become more regulated
if not for engineering reasons then for reasons of insurance and
liability. Money and commerce are the most powerful forms of energy
there are.</p>
<p>In the UK the government wanted to (wants to?) introduce a
professional qualification and license. The obvious starting point
is Chartered Engineer. In fact this was part of the original
thinking behind the Engineering Council and C.Eng. I think that
whatever develops it will come from the C.Eng., especially with the
tie in to Eur. Ing. There is no reason for any degree qualified
embedded engineer not to join the IEE and go for Chartered Engineer
status. See if your employer will assist. Tell them it is tax
deductible and they may need staff who are Chartered in the not too
distant future.</p>
<p>For embedded engineering, both hardware and software engineers
would get a C.Eng. via the IEE (<a href="http://www.iee.org"
target="_top">http://www.iee.org</a>), pure software engineers
could also talk to the BCS. For Chartered Engineer you require a
suitable degree and experience. For older applicants, experience
and other qualifications are taken into account so, at the moment,
a lack of a degree if you have experience is not a bar. Note: For
the UK and Europe you will need the IEE not the US IEEE. The IEEE,
obviously, cannot confer Chartered Status.</p>
<p>As there is more licensing (and more pressure for licensing)
within the UK, EU, USA, Canada, Australia and rest of the world and
as embedded SW becomes more integral to most (safety related) parts
of modern life, the UK will have to follow the rest into some form
of licensing. This is inevitable.</p>
<p>Eventually the term &quot;Engineer&quot; might actually become a respected
profession in the UK the same as it is in Germany and Texas. On the
bright side, last month being a Chartered Engineer got me a
reduction on my house insurance! So it is of practical use now.</p>
<p>Well, can you answer the question: Are you an Engineer? More
importantly will you still be able to call yourself an Engineer in
five years time?</p>
<div class="sidebar">
<p>This article was originally published in Embedded Systems
Engineering (<a href="http://www.esemagazine.co.uk/" target=
"_top">http://www.esemagazine.co.uk/</a>) and is reproduced here
with kind permission of the editor. It is also available with the
other columns in this series on www.phaedsys.org under the SW
Engineering button.</p>
</div>
</div>
</p>
<p><strong>Notes:</strong>&nbsp;</p>
<p><em>More fields may be available via dynamicdata ..</em></p>
</div>
</channel>
</rss>
