Greetings, comrades.

Until very recently, I was under the impression that there was effectively one VRCT, and several routes for inclusion [SCCT, IPEM, ART, etc.]. Is this correct, or are the various organizations holding separate registers?
If so, what happens [when registration finally becomes compulsory] in the event of the DoH selecting a register other than the one my name is on?
Basically, is there one VRCT, or are there many?

I am not going to ask which is the best route, as I am sure to get wildly differing answers!

Regards, folks
Mike [Kinvarra's child].

Ok so we are bit slow up here in the North but I have only just heard of this. Can someone please explain to me why people I have heard of, are proposing to make me hand over some of my hard earned cash (soon to be a lot less under Hidden AFC)just so that I can continue to do the job I have done for the last dozen years with no problem at all. What benefits will I gain from this registration scheme ?

I may have hold of the wrong end of the stick here but over the years many of us doing this type of job have acknowledged that there is inadequate training and professional development of technologists working in the NHS and certainly no career structure or status associated with working as technologists. Looking to the future it's probable that improvements in the quality of technologists, the services they provide and their salaries can only be maintained (or justified) by introducing a structure that leads to us becoming part of a profession i.e. we actually become recognised professionals instead of talking about how we got distinctions at HNC, ONC; whatever.

Just because you have an academic or vocational qualification, like most if not all of us do, or have done an apprenticeship does not mean you are a professional and fit to do your job because your management (some of whom may not have the appropriate qualifications to judge this) has employed you - it means you have some raw knowledge, skills and experience that currently fits the bill, on paper. As we know the requirements of our job roles could be about to change with AfC and it also looks like professionals with state registration will be required eventually.

The professional aspects of the job are complimentary to the raw knowledge and are more to do with adequate training to carry out the job, acceptable conduct, experience, continuing professional development, professional networks, best practice, the services or roles provided, etc, etc. All about assessment of individuals abilities in attaining and then maintaining the standards laid down to do the job professionally.

Hence the need for such as structure to be laid down so that acceptable standards, uniformity and quality of the service can be established and maintained, overseen by a professional body, post qualification and individuals details maintained on a state register. To set up a profession we need support from a recognised professional institution and the prospective membership of the profession. IPEM seems to be the body that is in a strong position to do this. Support from those of us who are interested in promoting a profession is provided by the voluntary register - administered solely by IPEM I think but with entrants from other affiliated bodies, associations and institutions who also work as technologists in healthcare. I see the VRCT as a means to an end.

Otherwise we do a job that requires certain skills but we are not recognised as healthcare professionals. Not that it matters to me whether somebody thinks I'm a professional or not but without recognition and some status in the NHS the occupation would be dumbed-down and lost (which seems to be happening at the moment - wonder if this could happen if we were considered to be professionals that could not be replaced by any TDH?).

My view is that state registration for individuals in the NHS will be a means of providing evidence that an individual is "fit to practice" working in an area of Healthcare Science, working without supervision. Just like other healthcare professions where individuals have the cability to do harm if they are not up to the job. With this registration comes the necessity to maintain standards of conduct, training and professional development which means that the employer is obliged to support this. Otherwise individuals should not be allowed/expected to work unsupervised, without adequate training or continuing professional development and a career pathway.

It looks to me like many who, for a long time, have sat around scoffing at those who are motivated and interested in their job - many who have tried to develop their skills, training and qualifications despite hinderance and a lack of support from employers, will have to "get up to speed" and develop themselves if they want to be treated as professionals. We need to look further ahead than to the next pay-packet and towards a future for our "profession", otherwise it won't exist much longer. If somebody has thoughts on this subject then perhaps they would be good enough to spend a little of their time to express them in a post or something.

Firstly, Bill McG - you are right in the sense that many of us have carried out our work with no ill effects [no pun intended]. This may be because the vast majority of us work with a conscience. I for one take very seriously the fact that my name goes on every piece of kit I work on, and carry out my work with that in mind. However, surely you must have, at some point, come across a colleague who's practices are "a little less consciencious"? This in itself demontrates that we are not all working to the same standard.

RL - I agree with your comments. When we consider the broad vista of careers in the NHS, every other discipline which brings one into contact with patients, where one's actions can beneficially or maleficially affect said patient, requires some form of state registration. I personally see the VRCT [or its eventual compulsory offspring] as a good thing. We are in the strange position of having a career, but not a recognised profession.
For all their faults, the Government do seem to be beginning to recognize us. The "Making The Change" booklet recognized us by name. We also had the NHS Modernisation Agency "Healthcare Scientists" day on March 26 2003. State registration is another step in this process.

One more thing, RL - just to clarify: your understanding is that the VRCT is held solely by IPEM? Do folks applying through the other bodies get included on this register?
Perhaps some input from representatives of the various organizations would help.

Many thanks to both of you for your comments.
Mike :smilewink:

Mike, you are correct in so far as there definetely people in this workshop who are less able than others and we do not all work to the same standards. However I see this as a failure of the management to pick people who are competent to do the job and their failure to pick up on this when they are in post. I don't see how state registration will improve this situation. I have heard all these promises before and they have never come to anything. I know nothing of these people who purport to have my interests at heart. From here it seems to be no more than an Old Boys Club. Our professor was chairman of IPEM for a couple of years maybe four or five years back and he certainly never any of us aware of what was about to happen (although this probably because he never speaks to us about anything) I am not convinced that this is the panacea you seem to hope for.

Mike, as I noted in my post, I think the VRCT is administered by IPEM - they keep the register but of course other affiliated institutions forward members applications (those who meet the necessary standards and work in healthcare) to be included in the register if accepted. There was a grandfather clause but whether that's been extended or not I'm not certain.

Bill,

There is no answer to the age-old problem of workshop politics, personal preferences and who has the bosses ear - another form of the "old-boys club" many complain about every day. I say it is better to tie the bosses hands, using regulations, so that suitable individuals are appointed, trained and developed based on ability and qualifications rather than have to train and support the "bosses mates" on the job as I have seen done before - now that really was an old boys club if ever I saw one.

From what I've seen the "old boys club" that you refer to can be observed in a lot of EBME, clinical engineering and Medical Physics departments because hospital management cannot get their act together to ensure professionals are appointed into these technician roles (note I say Technician roles, since we should have technical managers I think) and adequately regulated. I am against a core of sometimes less than motivated individuals or megalomaniacs and "little Napoleons" getting all the resources and being trained, developed and highly paid for doing little more than the rest of us whilst others, who are sometimes more motivated and consistently demonstrate their commitment, (including lower grades) are left out in the cold, professionally speaking.

Hopefully with the requirements of registration if certain aspects of technicians career development (such as training, professional development, career pathways etc, etc) were a requirement then perhaps we could all have a chance to devlop careers based upon similar levels of knowledge, skills, professional abilities and need for our services - a more level playing field rather than a scenario of the "blessed few" who may have scrambled to the top, engineering their job role without being regulated, possibly at others expense and "pulled-up the ladder" - that, no doubt, we will begin to see happening more and more as AfC takes hold.

If it means keeping a job I like to do I don't mind demonstrating my commitment to it (something I am interested in and motivated to do). I have to accept that if my abilities are recognised they will be regulated so that there's less chance of me doing harm (through my ignorance and a lack of support from my employer). Jumping through hoops and becoming a member of a "club" may be the only way. I see it as insurance because if I don't do it then perhaps I will be "left further out in the cold", so to speak. After putting in a lot of hard work I wouldn't want to see the lack of a piece of paper stopping me from continuing. What's there to lose - or is it that there may be some work involved?

As I understand it, the VRCT is independent of IPEM but uses IPEM for administrative purposes. Both of the other affiliates (ART, IEE) actively participate in the application process rather than just forward applications.

Most of us are probably professional in our approach to the job we do and, for me, membership of the VRCT shows a willingness to abide by a set of standards and code of professional conduct.

I do agree that IPEM does still appear to be heavily focussed on the scientists and some of them don't seem to even recognise that technologists exist or do an extremely valuable job.

Do you know of any other viable alternatives to achieve structured education, training, work experience, state registration and regulation for those working in healthcare Techman? I suppose we could continue to get by taking on the lowest grades possible and letting them rot, which is what we're heading for at the moment but I think we should try to move on, as a profession, by any means possible. Even if it is under the wing of scientists rather than engineers, for now.

My view is, like it or lump it, that if IPEM administers the register and coordinates the recognised training schemes, nationally, then there aren't too many options are there? Except by setting up your own non-recognised "club" with the academic clout and credibility necessary, perhaps. The way I see it the Physicists provide the "academic input" and "credibility", plus the infrastructure of IPEM to push state registration for technicians through.

I, like many others working as technicians, can do the academic-stuff and show others how to do the engineering side of the job but there aren't enough of us out there to set up an infrastructure like IPEM has, yet. I have no doubt that there is an agenda that suits those governing IPEM and will be used to strengthen the Physicists role in medical equipment management rather than highly skilled technicians or, academically speaking, professionally qualified engineers like myself but what's the alternative - should we do nothing?

You may have noted in my posting above that I referred to the fact we need technical managers - perhaps it is not ideal that Physicists generally manage Medical Physics equipment maintenance departments but many technicians are stuck with it for now - plus we need to be less selfish and include EBME departments, of course. I'm a corporate member of the IEE (MIEE) and on the engineering council register but what's the relevance to my role in healthcare and any contribution I make in the future?

I'm looking for something relevant that protects my occupation i.e professional registration that prevents charlatans from meddling and giving my "profession" a bad name. Anyhow what about new starters coming in - what do they get out of it? - shouldn't they expect to have some sort of a career if they're prepared to do the academic stuff along with the technical stuff and continue to work for a lower potential salary in the NHS?

RL - I think that you may have mis-understood. I think that the VRCT is a good thing and I am registered with them. The sooner that proper registration is brought in the better. Perhaps then we might get more recognition.

As far as IPEM itself goes it may be the biggest but in my experience they are not really concerned with us little guys. Perhaps that is our fault and maybe if the technologist members were more vociferous things would be different.

No, I don't think that we should just take the lowest grades, we should base appointments upon what the job requirements are. If that means high grades or graduates then bring them on.

You mention the need for Technical Managers. I agree. In fact, I have that title and, in my own small way I am one of those who has been getting involved and trying to improve our lot.