Engineers Australia MIEAust and CPEng - Is it worthwhile? 1

[bugbus]

Sorry if this is not the right forum for this, but I figure it is relevant to the AS/NZS stuff.

How does everyone feel about Engineers Australia membership (MIEAust) and Chartership (CPEng)?

Apart from the (admittedly high quality and quite regular) seminars, webinars and the like (which I unfortunately don't have time to make use of), I can't really think of many benefits of being a member, and I probably wouldn't be if my work did not pay for it. Whereas other professional organisations seem to put a great deal of effort into promoting the esteem of the profession, pushing for better pay (e.g. trades, nurses, teachers, doctors, lawyers, etc.), and generally working in the interest of their members, I'm not exactly sure what the point of EA is or what benefit it is to most engineers.

Chartership is another thing. It seems like such a huge amount of effort and work to get there, but for what gain? The recognition would be a nice perk, but it is rarely a requirement to do any sort of work, especially as a junior to mid-level engineer. Most workplaces, from what I can glean, do not reward chartership with any remuneration benefit. Maybe only about one half of the engineers I work with have CPEng (or some international equivalent); the other half are equally as skilled and experienced but simply have never bothered.

I have not been in the field for a very long time, so would be interested to hear some more experienced opinions on all this.

 

[hokie66]

Not sure which state you are in. If in Queensland, you must be registered.

https://www.engineersaustralia.org....te and,statutory regulations that require it.

 

[rscassar]

Yes it is. And I don't think it's a huge amount of effort. I wouldn't try to rush it at the start of your career. You should be more focussed on developing your skills. But I think it should be something that you aim to get around the 8 to 10 year mark.

 

[Settingsun]

MIEAust carries no weight so its value depends on whether you have a use of the member benefits.

CPEng in practice seems to mean colleagues will come to you to sign things. It's convenient to have when a client drops a requirement for CPEng sign-off at the last moment but that's about all. It also makes/will make state registration basically a rubber stamp but supervision rules and limited enforcement will provide a workaround as they do in Qld.

Overall, wouldn't pay my own money and know several who don't even spend company money. Would be a different story if one man band.

 

[hokie66]

In my opinion, if engineering is to be considered a profession, registration should be mandatory. Lawyers, nurses, doctors, and a lot of other professions must be registered, and so should we. One area where Queensland leads, with its RPEQ requirements. There should be more enforcement, not less.

 

[Retrograde]

The recognition would be a nice perk, but it is rarely a requirement to do any sort of work, especially as a junior to mid-level engineer.

In Qld all engineering work needs to be certified by a chartered engineer. I understand NSW introduced something similar recently and Vic is about to.

https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/...trade-essentials/working-on-class-2-buildings

https://www.rpeng.org.au/RPEng/Vict...spx?hkey=aabdf8dc-979b-4adb-a126-70d3bd29bb62

Most workplaces, from what I can glean, do not reward chartership with any remuneration benefit.

That has not been my experience. Generally I have found that most companies will not promote you to senior level or above if you are not chartered.

 

[Just Some Nerd]

Based in NSW and fairly early on in my career but...for the most part everyone I've worked with across a few companies view chartering as only useful if you're required to sign off on things (though I am under the impression the actual requirement here in NSW is being registered as a Professional Engineer / Design Practitioner with Fair Trading and specifically for those working on Class 2 projects - feel free to correct me on that if more familiar). That would be what leads to the situation in that only those in the higher level roles are making use of it. For everyone else, as long as they're working under someone registered as a professional engineer, they don't really need any qualification to work.

As for MIEAust, I have no idea what it would be needed for in the workplace. Outside of the workplace the seminars and the like seem interesting at least, if I ever had the time to go to any.

 

[FreddyNurk]

In Qld all engineering work needs to be certified by a chartered engineer. I understand NSW introduced something similar recently and Vic is about to.

Semantics, but that isn't true. All Professional Engineering work in Queensland must be supervised by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ). This is a legislative basis, not accreditation under Engineers Australia or others. Conversely, being an RPEQ does not allow for practicing in NSW or Victoria without also being registered on the relevant state board.

CPEng has often been a proxy as it meets the assessment criteria for RPEQ (and for the last few years at least, EA has been an assessment entity). CPEng is the definitive criteria in NT for membership of the Building Practitioners Board, which is required for certain disciplines (such as structural and mechanical).

One of the main benefits of being chartered is that it's accepted as meeting the criteria for registration in any of the states. Since the states have not managed to agree on any reciprocal agreements this is a benefit if you wish to work in various states of Australia. If you're only ever expecting to work in the one location your entire career then CPEng is probably less appealing. I also understand that one can get registered on the NER now without having to go through the chartered process, and this avenue also allows for registration as an RPEQ. In that case CPEng may be of less benefit.

 

[BJI]

I see no value in my EA membership, and it is significantly more expensive than any other professional membership I hold. As for CPEng and NER/RPEQ, it is occasionally useful for work in Qld, but apart from that, it comes down to the individual work place to value the accreditation and generally I find that most don't (at least in WA).

I do agree that all engineers should be registered, or at least those directly supervising and signing off on work of others. However, I don't think the current CPEng system really addresses competence or key abilities required in specific areas. It is particularly lacking on the design engineering side, and while I understand that EA doesn't support design engineering in Australia (with an apparent sole focus on projects, leadership and management), I believe there is a need for a separate assessment criteria and certification levels for those in responsible charge of design.

 

[Retrograde]

Semantics, but that isn't true. All Professional Engineering work in Queensland must be supervised by a Registered Professional Engineer of Queensland (RPEQ).

I agree - but as a structural engineer 99% of the work I do falls under Professional Engineering. I understand that may not be the case for mechanical/electrical/hydraulics engineering.

 

[human909]

I'm genuinely curious to hear more from all the people in this thread who have responded regarding questioning the value of being registered. What sort of work do you do? What sort of company? Who signs off on the work? How many years have you been a structural engineer?

Part of the reason why I'm so curious is that I'm fairly cut off from the way most structural consulting firms work and type of work most structural engineers do. My pathway has been fairly odd for a structural engineer. At the beginning I lacked suitable mentorship so I had to forge my own way with care.

Regarding EA. I've heard many engineers express how useless they are and that it is just a ticket clipping exercise. RPEng is the budget version of the CPEng and given the lack of benefits from a CPEng I expect more engineers to go down this path particularly because it is cheaper and easier.

In my opinion, if engineering is to be considered a profession, registration should be mandatory. Lawyers, nurses, doctors, and a lot of other professions must be registered, and so should we. One area where Queensland leads, with its RPEQ requirements. There should be more enforcement, not less.

I agree. Honestly in many ways it is quite shocking we don't have proper professional registration requirements. That said, it does not seem that the quality of engineering in Australia is any worse than places such as the US which has far more onerous requirements. Though the number of extremely poor decisions that I see from professional engineers, especially young ones, does make me worry a bit. (I would count myself as a 'young' engineer'.)

 

[blihpandgeorge]

CPEng and MIEAust just commercial titles. CPEng does give some credibility and stamp of honour, primarily as there is not much else around that is known. It isnt however a gold standard of competence by any means. IStructE is held in much higher regard but is lesser known and can do all the things CPEng provides. As an employer, your career does hit a glass ceiling without CPEng (or IStructE) (we are mid sized in the 50-100 staff basket).

State registrations in Qld / Vic do not require CPEng, but it can make it easier. I understand that NSW does not accept CPEng as a form of compentence for Class 2 buildings with the background that it didnt see it as providing competence for structural engineers. NT Registration is very easy with CPEng.

 

[Retrograde]

State registrations in Qld / Vic do not require CPEng, but it can make it easier.

My understanding is that as a structural engineering in Qld, to get the RPEQ registration, you first need to be chartered by either Engineers Australia or the Institution of Structural Engineers.

Possibly you could also go through Professionals Australia, but I am not sure if that applies to structural engineering or not?

 

[FreddyNurk]

My understanding is that as a structural engineering in Qld, to get the RPEQ registration, you first need to be chartered by either Engineers Australia or the Institution of Structural Engineers.

Possibly you could also go through Professionals Australia, but I am not sure if that applies to structural engineering or not?

Not the case either. In years gone by BPEQ was their own assessment entity, or they would accept assessment from a designated assessment entity, which was mostly Engineers Australia.
Now, as noted for Institute of Structural Engineers, there are a number of assessment entities that can assess, some of them subject to discipline (such as IStructE, or AusIMM). My understanding is that the Board no longer assesses directly.

If one was assessed directly through BPEQ they got RPEQ and that was it. If they chose to go through EA and get CPEng, then with the additional application (there are criteria for RPEQ in addition to CPEng) one would get both. Now there is the option to only be assessed for RPEQ by an assessment entity.

Also worth noting that in my previous response there was no specific discipline mentioned, this is as the Board in QLD does not make any delineation on discipline, rather whether or not it is considered a Professional Engineering service. One can be registered under one or more disciplines but that's in regards to area of competence, not whether or not it's a Professional Engineering service. If it's considered a Professional Engineering service under the definition of the state board, then one needs to be an RPEQ or supervised by one. CPEng doesn't come into it.