Status: Selection of nominees for the BME

25 May 2012

Things have moved fast for the Board of Mechanical Engineering - Nominating Committee since their official appointment last April 14. I recently learned from the grapevine that the members have been meeting regularly in full force (yes, all 5 of them). This is not an easy accomplishment for busy individuals, given that some of them are based in the Visayas, which not only reflects commitment, but is also an indication that they have taken their task seriously.

I also learned that the 5 gentlemen, all of them reportedly independent minded, initially had different ideas on how to conduct the search, but have eventually forged the general guidelines on how to go about their task. I only hope that the search guidelines they agreed upon is geared to make sure that they will come up with a list of worthwhile nominees for the 3 BME positions.

Perhaps, we, the members of the profession can help the BME-NC by adopting what I suggested in my earlier article (“The BME and EO496,” PJ, 28 April)… that of getting involved in the search effort by sending recommendations to the BME-NC. We should be capable of giving quality recommendations given that a lot of us practitioners would have an idea of the qualifications and capabilities of our peers. This means that if any of us is aware of a practitioner (or practitioners) that fit the requirements for the BME position, we should take the initiative to send recommendations to the BME-NC. It may also be that if anyone of us feels qualified for the position, we should apply ourselves…or ask another practitioner to do the recommendation. Self application letters, or recommendation letters (with Curriculum Vitae attached) can be emailed to the BME-NC Chairman, Engr. Renato A. Florencio (raf@pldtdsl.net), and I would suggest that copies be furnished also to the four other members, namely, Engr. Saylito M. Purisima (smpengineering@yahoo.com), Engr. Ramon F. Solis (mon_solis@ yahoo.com), Engr. Danilo P. Hernandez (Hernandez-dph@gchi.com.ph), and Engr. Expedito S. Bollosos (exbollosos@yahoo.com).

Just for clarification, EO 496 requires that candidates for the BME should have “demonstrated outstanding qualifications” as the search would be “based strictly on merit, integrity and fitness”. Other attributes required of candidates are that of having “proven leadership qualities,” “professional competence and experience,” “impeccable integrity,” “up-to-date knowledge of current theories, principles and practices in the profession,” and “capability to perform the duties and fulfil the obligations of a Regulatory Board Member.”

And if I may just reiterate a personal take on the matter which was also mentioned in my earlier column…that the next BME be “composed of professionals who are focused on the enhancement of the mechanical engineering profession; those that are receptive to changes, more creative, and willing to explore new methods (that are within the bounds of the ME law) which will enable them to achieve what is mandated; [and] those that have the time, capacity and capability.” In addition, I also feel that at least one member of the BME should be a hard core manufacturing industry practitioner, as I believe that manufacturing is  still  very much the primary client of the mechanical engineering profession. A development such as having a manufacturing practitioner in the BME would also dovetail with the plans of President Pnoy to revitalize the manufacturing industry as one of the strategies in his effort to improve the country’s economy.

This writer also enjoins those practitioners who feel they are qualified to take advantage of this rare chance to do something for the mechanical engineering profession, and for that matter, for the country. Apply now, as the window for this opportunity is not big. I got the impression from the discussions during the 4^th NBMeeting last April 14 that the BME-NC would accomplish their task as fast as they could, as under the current BME vacancy situation, time is of the essence. The latest info I got from the grapevine is that they intend to finalize by May 30.

By the way, this writer appreciates the various positive responses (received via text, email, web messages and phone calls) to “The BME and EO 496” article. There has been a sharp increase in the “reach” of the Mekaniko webpage from 2,186 to 4,376 “netizens” (a 100% increase) and “likes” from 200 to 361 “netizens” (an 80% increase) - just 2 days after the article was published. Some commented about the information being an “important development and… [that they’d] certainly welcome changes for the better”; about the “PSME’s transparency in the selection of the BME as well as an initial move of reconciliation”; as well as “hoping that MEs will show more concern and react positively”.

Comments/reactions from the readers, especially from the other 60,000 or more registered mechanical engineers, can be sent through this writer’s email (sl3.mekaniko@gmail.com) or through this writer’s blog (mekaniko-sl3.blogspot.com).