The Engineering Profession Act (EPA) states that: "A person who is not registered in terms of this Act, may not perform any kind of work identified for any category of registered persons”.

In simple terms, if you are not registered in terms of the EPA then you may not perform work which has been identified in terms of the EPA.

This can be viewed from a few different angles:

• You must be registered to perform identified work;
• Identified work can only be performed by registered persons;
• You need not register if you do not perform any identified work.

The purpose of the identification of work is thus to define the practice area which is exclusively set aside for registered persons. This seems to be a reasonable arrangement, and provides the necessary protection of the public and the profession.

The problem we face is that ten years after the EPA was signed into law, there is still no identified work for the engineering profession. ECSA and the CBE are at loggerheads over this crucial issue, and they don’t seem to be making any headway in resolving the impasse.

So where does that leave the engineering professional? If you register then you bind yourself to the code of conduct which can be used against you if you misbehave. But you get nothing in return. You don’t get identified work which is reserved for you. You don’t get the assurance that unregistered persons performing identified work will be prosecuted. And you don’t get the assurance that companies carrying out identified work will be prosecuted if they allow unregistered persons to do the work. All you get is the risk of disciplinary action if you misbehave, while the unregistered person is free to do as he likes and cannot be touched by ECSA.