News of the Register of Clinical Technologists {Link broken}

I'll let you all make your own judgements.

Hopefully, this is the article that was linked to: http://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/...l-technologists

Admin.

Voluntary Registers - NHS Employers

While joining an accredited register is not a compulsory requirement and cannot be required as a condition of employment, employers should take every opportunity to raise the profile of the type of accredited registers available to staff as part of their recruitment process, and encourage them to consider the benefits of joining one.

Why?

Quote "The quality mark will give extra peace of mind for anyone employing a clinical technologist, letting them know that anyone who holds the mark is committed to high standards. The RCT is pleased to offer the quality mark to Clinical Technologists that meet the far reaching standards of our register, as approved by the Professional Standards Authority."

I dont know what the far the reaching standards are for the RCT and Ive been in it since the beginning. I give them £10 every year and used to get a nice certificate sent out annually but even that has stopped. One of the techs in our place forgot to renew his membership on time and is now off the register - who cares - he is one of the best techs in the place.

I noticed the RCT Fee was nearly doubled this year! What exactly is our money paying for?

RCT seems utterly pointless if there are no checks on the quality of the work. There are some pretty poor and very lazy technicians in the NHS and many of them are on this register.

I think we need a referendum.

Kit, what is a 'clinical technologist' this obsession with fancy titles is extremely annoying. Before joining any register, endorsing a register, sort out the official title of a Biomedical Engineer/Technician on a National Level. Having the title 'Clinical' somehow indicates that you have medical training as well as engineering skills, but then again does a 'technologist' deal with patients or equipment?

To me, "clinical technologist" has always sounded like someone who works in the lab - that is, a Laboratory Technician. But no doubt there is another (and probably more than one) NewSpeak name for lab techs these days, as well.

Exactly! And going along with this kind of language means that Engineers are made to sound like second class workers, when some of them should be rewarded for being some of the most valuable personnel keeping the organisation going forward and up to date.

But they are rewarded, surely (assuming that they get paid)?

Second class ... fourth class; speaking for myself I don't care (and never have overly much) what "they" think.

Biomeds (some, but by no means all) have been bleating on about "status", "recognition", "respect" (as in, lack of) etc. for as long as I can remember. My advice is to ignore (rise above) all that BS, and just be content with the work that you do.

That reminds me of the time I was told (in confidence) that a letter had been received mentioning that "<a certain medical engineering technician> expresses himself best through the work that he does"; and I thought that a fitting accolade.

"Biomed technician" (or, occasionally, and depending upon where I was, "engineer" - or muhandis) has always worked for me. And, if asked by someone of the Joe Public variety what I did, something along the lines of "tech support of medical equipment" generally sufficed (before the yawns set in).