I personally think that the current Chartership is pretty much a
waste of time and does not really carry much weight in the
profession. And this is from something who underwent the Route
A in the old LA almost 10 years ago. Perhaps if this has changed
significantly someoneone could let me know, but doesn't it still
involve the writing of a PDR.
I agree with the notion that having chartered status is a sign of a
professional body and its member and other professions whose
mechansim have to undertake various examinations etc such as
accountants, lawyers, etc have such a mechanism. Unfortunately
if we are being brutally honest and whilst this is regrettable, we still
lag somewhat behind these professions not least in equivalent
salaries and status(barring a few areas of our profession). Our
chartership procedure does little to change this and is also
certainly not a guaranteed sign of an individuals professional
knowledge or competence.
Finally I think Chartership is also used by some employers to
deliberately keep employment costs down and use it as a bar to
staff salary advancement. It seems paying a desultory £13-14,000
for a graduate (often postgraduate) professional is not enough!
Make them jump through a more hoops till paying them a decent
wage seems to be the order of the day
Dominic Broadhurst
> I think that we all need to remember that to obtain Chartership is not the
> same as educational qualifications. In order to obtain Chartered status
> (MCLIP) we have to do quite an amount of work and effort to bring ourselves
> up to a higher professional status. Chartership must be earned above and
> beyond educational and on the job training. The fact that our professional
> organization promotes Chartership by telling employers that Chartered
> members are "professional qualified applicants" is a very good thing.
>
|