FREE CLIENT CONSULTATIONS
No obligation. Find out what we offer:- - Global Search
- - Targeted Recruitment
- - Talent Engaged and Retained
- - Recognised by Industry
- - Respected by The Profession
Senior Project Manager
Location » Perth WA
We are currently looking for expressions of interest from Senior Project Managers for a leading design...
Featured Job
Regulation? Exclusion? Where to for the engineering profession in WA?
By John Masters, 14 October 2009
Discussion Paper
The question of whether it is necessary to regulate the engineering profession in Western Australia has been put to the public for comment in a discussion paper jointly prepared by The Government of Western Australia and Engineers Australia.
The discussion paper, which can be downloaded at www.buildingcommission.wa.gov.au/bc/Discussion_Papers.aspx, includes input from other professional engineering associations including the Association of Consulting Engineers Australia (ACEA), Association of Professional Engineers, Scientists and Managers, Australia (APESMA) and the National Engineering Registration Board (NERB). It begins by identifying risks that may be addressed through a regulatory regime. The Discussion Paper looks at various models that could be applied to regulate the engineering profession, including whether a registration system should be explicitly controlled by government, or by way of a co-regulatory approach, where government and the profession work together.
The paper gives detailed consideration to aspects ranging from restrictions on who may deliver an engineering service to restriction on the use of the title ‘engineer’ and ‘registered engineer’. Significantly it poses the question of which categories of engineers should be included as well as appropriate education, experience and competency requirements.
Engineers Australia
In a policy statement issued in June 2009, Engineers Australia states that it “believes that Australia should have nationally consistent State registration systems for the engineering profession.” Commenting on which engineers should be included, EA is of the view that “the registration system should include all professional engineers, other than graduates having less than five years’ experience since graduation who are not responsible for the approval or certification of designs, systems or their implementation”, and that “competency assessment should underpin the regulatory system with recognition of Chartered status and registration on the National Professional Engineers Register.”
As to the question of which occupational categories should be included in a regulatory regime, EA suggests that “in time, the system should be extended to include Engineering Technologists and Associates.”
EA’s views were reflected in their comments throughout the Discussion Paper, along with those of the WA Government, APESMA, the NERB and ASEA.
Other Stakeholders
The WA Government “believes that a regulated environment for engineers and the provision of engineering services in WA will provide greater assurance for both public safety, health and welfare and consumer protection”.
The NERB sees additional benefits in that “a Western Australia Registration system that matches the registration systems of Australia’s trading partners will facilitate the recognition of WA engineers wishing to deliver services overseas.”
APESMA “agrees with Engineers Australia in regards to the need for regulation of engineers and the need for recognition, status and protection.” However they do not support the idea that the system should be extended to include Engineering Technologists and Associates in order to “protect consumers from confusion between the occupation groups within engineering teams, and prevent the watering down of professional engineering.”
The ACEA also “believes that engineering technicians and associates should not be registered.” ACEA does however support a national registration system, stating that “widespread registration of engineers would raise professional standards and increase consumer understanding and confidence in Australian engineering.”
Implications for the Profession and Industry in WA
The proposed regularity regime will impact all members of the engineering team (including Professional Engineers, Technologists and Associates), as well as industry and employers particularly with respect to access to and availability of engineering skills.
For example, regulation is likely to have an impact on international mobility and consistency with our trading partners as well as countries where mutual recognition of engineering qualifications has been established. This is particularly important when considering the inclusion of all three occupational categories, in line with what happens in many overseas countries.
On the other hand an appropriately designed regulatory system will encourage the introduction of changes in industry and organisational structures that better reflect the defined roles of different occupational categories. This in turn will promote better use of scarce professional resources; raise professional standards and increase consumer understanding and confidence in the engineering profession.
APESMA talks of “watering down” of professional engineering and protecting “consumers from confusion between the occupation groups”, when in fact I believe that inclusion of the three recognised categories provides an opportunity to give consumers a much clearer understanding of the difference between various members of the team.
A regularity system that excludes Technologists and Associates may effectively force productive talent out of an occupation for which we are adequately qualified and experienced. Restricting registration to professional engineers introduces the risk of eroding a significant portion of available skills from contributing to the provision of safe and adequate services. In other words more work for a smaller pool of resources, with potential to generate higher costs (charges), and lower standards of service and safety resulting from limited opportunity to delegate tasks to other levels within ‘the engineering team”.
Furthermore, many Technologists who find themselves ready to provide services at more advanced levels have successfully met the requirements for articulation to a higher occupational category, and this is largely due to their ability to operate as and integral part of the engineering team.
The closing date for public comment was 30 September 2009, but debate on the merits and make up of a suitable regime is likely to continue for some time as the road to regulation unfolds. talent torque will monitor progress and report on any developments. In the meantime readers are encouraged to submit their own views and comments to:
The closing date for public comment was 30 September 2009, but debate on the merits and make up of a suitable regime is likely to continue for some time as the road to regulation unfolds. talent torque will monitor progress and report on any developments. In the meantime readers are encouraged to submit their own views and comments to:
talenttorque @ jsmappointments.com.au
About the author:
John Masters is a Technologist member of Engineers Australia with more than 25 years of design and project experience in the electrical engineering discipline. He is also a registered Professional Technologist with the Engineering Council of South Africa. John is currently a director of an employment services firm that specialises in the referral of engineers, technologists and associates, and has during the past five years been extensively involved in the recruitment of engineers for companies in various industries across Australia.
COMMENTS
LEAVE A REPLY
No comments.