Once I tried to ask advice about recruiting somebody to do design investigation work, and a second time I ask about licensing of Chartered and Incorporated Engineers working in a similar environment. Both times people with chips on shoulders subvert it into a public rant about the status of qualified technicians / LAE / call yourself what you like. The term "professional engineer" is a misnomer often applied to "white collar" rather than "blue collar" engineers and the reason I used it in my previous post, which was perfectly clear.
Unless you feel qualified to conduct an Euler Buckling load analysis of a strutted wing, analyse the fatigue life of a drilled bracket, calculate the stresses in a modified seat harness, convert non-ISA flight test results to standard conditions, argue in incessant meetings with the CAA over changes to safety standards, and 101 other aspects of my job, why not get off your bandwagon and admit there are different jobs and qualifications, all equally necessary, all very difficult, requiring different qualifications, to some extent overlapping, but all called "Engineer".
Okay, I'll admit it, I have a degree, a handful of letters after my name, and although I spent some years of my life in overalls in a workshop or hangar environment, I happen to be much better at analysing designs and investigating airworthiness problems. I probably get paid less than some technicians, which doesn't trouble me at-all. What troubles me, and the reason I posted this poll, is that there are people working in similar jobs to mine, without formal professional qualifications, and in some cases I have doubts about their competence. You, as a working LAE, do not suffer this problem since your colleagues have to be CAA licensed.
And incidentally, you have to live with the consequences of cock-ups by my sort of Engineer, so I'd have thought it was in your interest as well as mine to raise the standards.
G