EBME Forums Forums Management Professional Issues Statutory Regulation, Is there a Compelling Case?

I for one would employ the journeyman everyday of the week ove anyone boasting a handful of degrees obtained in the last 15-18 years (Blair through to Cameron)

Government predictions say by 2020 there will be round 25 million people over the age of 50 in the UK. That fact, plus the scrapping of the Default Retirement Age means our attitude to employing and retaining older staff within our workplace needs a radical overhaul. Does it make sense not to factor in the provisional journeyman because he has qualifications gained many years ago? To indirectly marginalise a sector of our workforce, because they have qualifications gained maybe forty years ago, would not be considered best practice. It would be prudent when planning for our present and future workforce needs, to consider that there is a shortage of qualified and experienced biomed applicants at present. The retention of skilled and experienced staff would make sense.


Especially when the Government has stated that in establishing voluntary registers, we would expect the regulators to draw on tools that already exist, such as the Knowledge and Skills Framework in the NHS.
The NHS recognises qualifications, or the equivalent level of experience and knowledge. So to my mind someone who currently performs the role, the provisional journeyman and has done so for many years, ticks the boxes for current and future employment, even if he/she doesn’t have a degree or HNC.



Jim, you have already stated that if an assured, or a statutory register is approved, that you may have to re-open the grand parenting route for some time to allow in people without the current qualification requirements, detailed in the primary entry criterion for the VRCT. So, if the provisional journeyman has been doing the job for some years, it would be questionable indeed, if he was not considered eligible to join (if he/she wanted).

@Chris: during my long journey, over many years, as a humble technician of lowly (in today's terms, that is) "qualifications", I have never come across the term "provisional journeyman".

Please try to use phrases that are commonly understood.

Also, as one who has been accused in the past (yes, right here on this forum) of making "racist" comments (whatever that over-used phrase means), am I allowed in turn to be "offended" by "ageist" remarks?

You can do more than be offended Geoff, age discriminatory practices, either direct or indirect, are legislated against by statute.

Yeah, well everything is against the law these days, is it not?

Personally, I'm more "offended" by sloppy grammar and poor spelling.

Anyway, as we all must know, theory and practice are two entirely different things! But if employers want to hire degree-qualified young knobs who don't know a Phillips screwdriver from the hole in their [censored], well I guess that's their look-out.

Hello Jim

My point about the journeyman is from the view point of a potential employee. For example someone in their 50s with vast engineering experience and older qualifications such as C&G or an ONC (accepting that a C&G Full Technological Certificate was accepted as equivalent to an HNC by both employees and universities) would not get past the paper shift. This would in my view (and in the view of some engineering institutions) unfairly discriminate against the older potential employee. We now experience the need to employ many oversees persons because they have the "required" degree whilst I know many older now redundant journeymen who could bring all the required skills to carry out the job of a Medical Engineering Technician.

Registration in its present form would result in future jobs for the recently qualified whilst the proven but older technician languishes in frustration as he would be denied even applying.

My views are not against considering if registration is desirable; but pointing out the impact of its age discrimination.

Barney

My (own) views are not against considering if registration is desirable; but pointing out its lack of practical impact!

Yet again I cry:- Certification on the American model!

Sean, I cannot disagree with that sentiment. It would be right and proper to open the process to all who could demonstrate that they had been working as a Clinical Technologist for some predetermined time.

Barney, I have always argued that there should be at least two routes into the profession, especially with regard to those working in engineering technologist positions. Route one being the vocational degree route which would attract school leavers and others wishing to follow a formal educational pathway. Route two would be followed by those who already have engineering knowledge but lack the necessary clinical background. That is why the training schemes run by IPEM and ART are so important because they can be used to fast track mature candidates. This is done by accreditation of prior and experiential learning and by providing the training (and, if necessary the education) required to fill any gaps in knowledge and skills. The award of a diploma at the end of this process is the means of entry to the VRCT.

Thus there should be no barriers created as a result of a person's age.

Do you know that was the very excuse used by some when Agenda for change (AFC) first came out! That the whole process was ageist as it seemed that those without an hnd/degree found themselves suddenly downgraded from band 6 to band 4 or lower. If anything that was far from the truth and the only journeymen who did were those who had been in the role for many years and didn't actually do any CPD or training and ended up as obsolete as the equipment they were originally employed to look after.

If anything you'll probably find the successful journeyman will be well trained, keeps up with technology and can prove that although they don't have a degree or hnd over the years they have equivalent. If anything from what I see a door will always be left open for them, as for the other variety of journeyman perhaps they need another kick up the arse like some of them got when AFC came in.