Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

What the Dickens

LETTERS

I was disappointed to read that George Ponsford believes that the technician grade is a 'Dickensian grade, worthy only of withering away from the Institution'.

However, I do agree that the technician has changed roles dramatically in the past few years. I began my career with a civil engineering consultant 'crafting drawings', and then progressed to utilising the power of CAD systems as little as 12 years ago.

I completed my technician review then and I am still a technician member of the Institution. I am a project manager within the rail industry having spent the past seven years involved in managing contractors in permanent-way infrastructure renewal. Like many technicians, my role has evolved with continued development, training and accreditation.

I would like to know whether the quaint Dickensian grade of technician is viewed similarly by all members of the ICE and whether my subscriptions would be better spent elsewhere. It is discouraging for technicians to observe that the grade has not progressed at the same pace as its members' careers.

Does the Institution believe that there is no place for any non-chartered members in the industry?

Andrew Lambden, alambden@constructionplus.

net

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.