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.