Personal and Professional Development Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

Personal and Professional Development - Essay Example Professional engineering qualifications at various levels are discussed below: Vocational A-Levels and Scottish Highers; SQA Higher National Certificate: These are courses for 1 or 2 years full time. These courses can be regarded as foundation qualifications for the engineering technicians and can be utilised to get admission in undergraduate studies. BTEC/Edexcel/SQA Higher National Diploma (HND): These are generally 2 years course, full time. The HND is well respected qualification and can help the student to upgrade as an Incorporated Engineer (IEng). By obtaining better marks, one can also get transferred into the 2nd or 3rd year of an undergraduate degree programme. Degree Courses: These courses include BEng (Hons) (Bachelor of Engineering) or MEng (Master of Engineering). A BEng (Hons) would generally take 3 to 4 years full time to complete. An accredited professional Bachelor’s degree would fulfil the educational requirements for registration at the level of Incorporate d Engineer (IEng). This sort of degrees as per the specifications of the Engineering Council must last at least 3 years full time. The MEng can be regarded as an integrated form of Master’s degree. It is a higher qualification than BEng (Hons). It takes 4 to 5 years full time to complete. An accredited professional MEng would fulfil the academic requirements for the Chartered Engineer (CEng) qualification. This level of engineering qualification is the best in the educational world of UK and is highly respected all across the industries. An accredited professional BEng (Hons) degree together with a suitable Master’s degree or appropriate extended learning to the Master’s level would also meet the educational requirements.... This paper stresses that the professional titles which are awarded by the Engineering Council are well protected by the law. Registration in Engineering Council by different engineers and technicians is voluntary. This report makes a conclusion that engineering is a challenging profession in the modern work environment. Globalisation requires the engineers to be competent and skilled at the global standards. United Kingdom needs a powerful army of engineers and technicians to combat recession and obtain economic growth. Therefore, the routes to personal professional accreditation in engineering are not easy. The authortThe candidates have to be sufficiently skilled, competent and up to the minute to become a professionally qualified engineer as per the UK standards. No doubt that pursuing a degree course like BEng or MEng is the best way to obtain in depth knowledge in the field and become a professionally qualified engineer. BEng and MEng programmes in civil and structural engineering provided by the UK universities cater to the global standards in this context. Else, if a student cannot pursue a university program for some reason, he can appear in the examinations conducted by the Engineerin g Council and progress through the Level 5, Level 6 and Level 7 qualifications in a step by step manner. An engineer must possess numerical ability, analytical skill, creativity, and most importantly, engineering aptitude to obtain the different engineering qualifications discussed so far and excel in the engineering field. An engineering qualification can serve as both a basic qualification and a specialised qualification, and thus it can open up several prospects.

Brady v Norman Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Brady v Norman - Essay Example His stint was cut short, however, when he got into a scuffle with the President of ASLEF, Mr. Samways on 20th May 2004 at a barbecue. After five days, he was suspended. In July of that same year, he was accused of forgery for signing a cheque in the name of the Assistant General Secretary, with the latter’s consent and knowledge. In August 2004, he was dismissed as General Secretary using the forgery and the barbecue scuffle as grounds. A claim for unfair dismissal was brought against the ASLEF by Mr. Brady, and the Employment Tribunal ruled in his favour. Upon appeal before the Employment Appeal Tribunal, the appeal was likewise dismissed. However, on June 5, 2006, the respondent Mr. Norman, who was the General Secretary voted to replace Mr. Brady, uttered these words before the ASLEF†S Annual Assembly of Delegates on 5th June 2006. The following words were made the basis of the defamation charge brought by Mr. Brady against Mr. Norman: â€Å"†¦ the facts are, Con ference, that the General Secretary was involved in a fight; the General Secretary was forging cheques and it is a matter of opinion – you can draw whatever opinion you like – as to whether his actions in the media brought the Union into disrepute. What you cannot possibly walk away from is that he was involved in a fight with the then President, and he forged cheques. ... Mr. Brady was awarded indemnity because the following words were deemed libellous: â€Å"ASLEF conference delegates declined to debate a proposition calling for former General Secretary Mr Brady to address Conference, coupled to efforts to consider his reinstatement. They felt it was pointless to discuss â€Å"a past era†. One compelling reason was that the Certification Officer had ruled the previous week that Mr Brady had legitimately been excluded from ASLEF membership for bringing the Union into disrepute. †¦Ã¢â‚¬ 3 However, the words spoken during the Assembly (the first quoted paragraph) did not come to the knowledge of Mr. Brady until September 2008. In 2009, or when the first libel action was concluded, Mr. Brady brought suit for defamation. Under the Defamation Act 2006, the statute of limitations to bring suit runs for only one year, and this likewise appears in section 4A of the Limitation Act 1980 as amended. Mr. Brady filed a Part 8 claim seeking disapplica tion of the one-year limit. Section 32A of the 1980 Act â€Å"enables the court to disapply section 4A if it appears to the court that it would be equitable to allow the action to proceed having regard to the degree to which the time limit prejudices the claimant and to the degree to which disapplying the time limit would prejudice the defendant.4† The Master ruled against disapplying the time limit and consequently moved to dismiss the claim, ruling that doing so would be prejudicial to the defendant. The case is then brought up on Appeal. Point of Law: The crux of the issue on appeal is whether or not there is merit in waiving the time limit in the case under Section 32A, considering that the jurisprudence