EBME Forums Forums Management Professional Issues Agenda For Change AfC and VRCT

Col,
Yes, possibly, but not likely as far as I am aware - have you studied the entry requirements of the VRCT and spoken to the IPEM administrators? Anyhow if this is the case - have you heard of relevant, concurrent training? Training for requirements in a relevant discipline - aiming towards a career in a profession? Promoting the ideal - not giving preference to those that just fancy an change in career and think they're equivalent. Perhaps the whole issue of what I'm getting at is this:

RELEVANT QUALIFICATIONS, EXPERIENCE, TRAINING - each need to be assessed for RELEVANCE and the individual should have to demonstrate COMPETENCES.

The engineering attributes you possess are possibly second to none but you've not had the required relevant training or experience - the Graduate you give as an example would possibly meet the requirements given a period of hands-on experience. It would still take time from starting on the career path to getting there as a registered professional.

You do not wake up one day, irrespective of how many years you've been an IEng, how many HNC's, ONC's, Degrees, etc, etc, and irrespective of how many Altimeters or Transponders you've tested in the aviation industry and know how to diagnose a fault on a High level multiparamter monitor, electrosurgery unit or know how to advise in a Clinical Support scenario. It takes time.

Exactly the point I'm making Col. You decided on a change of career. Unfortunately, for you, it's a time of change in 'Medical Engineering'.

Col

The aim of state registration is to strive for the highest possible professional standards. Professions such as doctors, nurses, pharmacists etc have been registered for many years. They are registered as they have the ability to harm patients if they do not work to a certain level. The Clinical Technologists also have the potential to affect the well being of patients if standards of work are below acceptable standards.

All Clinical Technologists who consider the safety of patients as an important factor should agree with state registration in principle and strive for the highest possible standards whether required to be registered or not.

Having a requirement for registration would certainly help with AfC as it supports that the work we do has a direct affect on patient care, if it didn't then there would be no justification for state registration. If that was the case the HPC would have thrown out the proposal.

I ask the question, why does a gas installer need to be CORGI registered?

"I ask the question, why does a gas installer need to be CORGI registered?"

Probably because Gas installers can easily be self employed and for the publics safety its a quick way of establishing competency. This should not and does not apply to Medical Physics who are all employed by a trust and competency can be judged in house.
If the aim is to "strive for the highest possible professional standards" then surely a profiency test would be more appropriate than a simple "how long have you worked in Medical Physics"

Mr Ling,
You seem to be spending a lot of time commenting on various subjects, who is doing the work you are paid for while you put your twopence worth in.

Guys,

Registration will not set the highest possible standards. We do as individuals and as managers / supervisors.

Registration to work means that if you make a professional error you can be struck off the register and cannot practice as in doctors etc.

Didn't stop Shipmen et al

What is there stopping you buying and fitting you own Gas fire?

It seems to me that all the VRCT is trying to do is set some sort of minimum standard for someone to be a clinical technologist. Surely this can't be a bad thing.

However, ultimately it will be the HPC that will decide the criteria for registration, not the VRCT which will become defunct.

From what I have picked up on the grapevine, the future HPC entry will require a Clinical Technology degree. How alternative qualifications and experience fit with this remains to be seen.

If we look to other groups, they tend to have a minimum post-graduate or post-entry training period before qualifying for registration. Why should we be any different?

If the HPC want to save themselves some work, they will just take the criteria that the VRCT currently use, which as I've said before, is too harsh. If I've been employed at a certain level and have satisfactorily completed a set probationary period, surely I should be able to join the register. Teachers are registered as soon as they take up post, even if they are Newly Qualified (formerly known as their probationary year).

Well Mr BobbyP I can afford to spend a lot of time doing this because I am actually on leave for a couple of weeks. I see it as a bit of a break from typing-up my M.Sc dissertation actually. Things aren't always what they seem are they? Most of my posts are done on my own time and my opinions are my own - not that of a sheep.

I would hope that anyone who knows me or who has worked with me would say I'm no slacker when it comes to work either.

Col,

Well, Col, I guess that if you're not registered then you will have to be supervised and your work checked so that you can be assessed for competence.

State Registration hopefully means uniform training and a basic level of competence that employers can rely on when selecting employees. It means that there is not a lottery in employing individuals from very diverse backgrounds and wondering how they will turn out after on the job training.

It's a means to an end as far as I'm concerned - I hope it pushes individuals with the attitude that they never want to develop or improve their standard of work because they're on a decent grade, thank-you very much to get off their ars*s and actually do something to prove they're the experts that I keep hearing them spout on about in this forum.

The attitude off some of you guys is unbelievable having the front to suggest in a public forum that you can just come into this job and be left to it - this suggests to me that gas fitters have a better set up for training and assessment than Clinical Technologists in some departments.

"From what I have picked up on the grapevine, the future HPC entry will require a Clinical Technology degree. How alternative qualifications and experience fit with this remains to be seen."

I suppose all of us with less than that (but enough to get the job in the first place) will just be left on the sidelines while the new graduates who dont know one end of a screwdriver from the other run the show.
We're doomed I tell you