I have no particular problem with this - I've got qualifications as an
Engineer and as a Technician - they are very different roles.
The Engineering Council, which deals with a lot more than just aerospace
uses the term Technician and Engineer. To call yourself either in their
eyes takes a lot of training and qualification. But in general I wouldn't
trust a maintenance Technician to design an aeroplane, any more than I'd
trust a design Engineer to maintain one. As it happens at a working level
Licensed Technicians are probably better paid than a just-qualified Graduate
Engineer anyway. It's just a shame that we are so out of step with the drivers (to make yourself feel good however, look how much a QFI gets!)
I'd love to see both terms being restricted by law (in the same way as
Doctors, Osteopaths, Accountants and other lesser professions) do - with a
fine or prison sentence for calling yourself an Engineer or Technician
without being properly qualified.
For lower forms of life below either we have the terms "Mechanic", "Fitter",
"Apprentice" or "Manager" depending upon preference.
Genghis CEng
N.B. JSS, I think you'll find that Rotorcraft defined in law asaircraft so ugly that they don't need wings to fly - the Earth just repels them.