Members & Qualifications Board

The life and times of a younger member volunteer and medicinal chemist.

You may have read in this month’s RSC News that I have been “elected” to the Members & Qualifications Board. I say “elected” as there were no other candidates for the position.

Since I wasn’t really elected, I thought I would share with you what would have been my manifesto. It remains a summary of what I hope to achieve during my time on the MQB. If there is any other area that falls within the MQB remit that you feel I could act as a voice for, please leave a comment or drop me a line.

Since getting involved with the RSC in 2002, I have experienced firsthand the benefits of RSC membership. It is very important to me that all members are provided with, and made aware of, the many opportunities and support the RSC provides. If our newest members have a positive experience, it is more likely they will get involved, remain members over their careers and recruit new members to the Society. I believe working on the MQB is the best way for me to contribute to these goals. I feel my experience working for and with younger members over several years would be beneficial to the MQB and the Society as a whole.

Ensuring that young chemists are equipped with both technical and transferable skills is ever more important in a global, competitive economy. Working through the MQB, I would hope to increase training and learning opportunities for young chemists, along the lines of the Younger Members Symposia, which I have been fortunate to have been involved in. Additionally I would like to improve the recognition of the CChem Award, ideally to the point where it is listed as an essential or desirable requirement for most, if not all, positions of a certain level.

It is vital that the opinions of young chemists are represented and respected at every level of the Society. The youngest of our members have the most to gain (and lose) in the future from policy and strategy decisions taken today. In that respect, I would like to establish and formalise the Younger Members Network as an Interest Group of the Society in its own rights, with its own funding stream under the control of a committee made up of members of the Younger Members Forum.

Posted by David Foley on Aug 7, 2012 6:02 PM Europe/London

Past Posts

2015 (1)

2014 (5)

2013 (2)

2012 (1)

2011 (2)

2010 (1)

Share this |

Leave a comment?

You must be signed in to leave a comment on MyRSC blogs.

Register free for an account at http://my.rsc.org/registration.

Comments

See more comments

David Foley

Date Posted: Aug 13, 2012 at 10:37 AM

Many thanks Chris, some very interesting points. Totally agree that having to sacrifice one of your three free IG's in order to be consider a younger members would not be ideal. I am not sure whether any proposed changes to the YMN strucutre would be accepatable (both the HQ and the YMN members) but I do feel the time is right for debate on the subject and perhaps to set up a working group to look at the various options and make recommendations.

Flag

Chris Satterley

Date Posted: Aug 8, 2012 at 3:37 PM

'enthuses' = 'enthused'

'that a status' = 'than a status'

One day I'll learn to be proper in what I wrote.

Flag

Chris Satterley

Date Posted: Aug 8, 2012 at 3:34 PM

David,

I'm looking forward to your tenure on the MQB as I think there is a lot for you to get your teeth into.

I completely agree with your desire to improve the training opportunities for young chemists (indeed all chemists!) and also in increasing the standing of CChem. On the latter I think the RSC is really moving in the right direction, but we constantly need to challenge the rigour and quality of CChem to fully complete the move from a system where CChem was a recognition of several year's of good standing to an independent qualification that denotes a commitment to continual professional development and practice as a chemist to the highest standards. I do think there is a discussion to be had about the current situation of having CChem and CSci, especially when we compare that to engineering where CEng is the single chartered status for all engineers.

As for the Younger Members' Network - formal recognition with the RSC structure and a defined funding stream are definitely things that should be aimed for, but I am concerned that positioning YMN as a standard Interest Group may have some issues...

As a younger member (just!) I don't want to have to drop one of my three 'free' choices of technical interest groups to be part of YMN. If you could ensure that YMN had the status of an IG (or at least a defined funding stream and autonomy), but without impacting on the choices of younger members to be part of technical interest groups then I would be much happier. But...

I do think that ensuring that our younger members are enthuses and retained as members is more important that a status as a specialist interest group. I think we should consider something larger, say a division-level organisation that had several 'interest groups' within it? This may be a step too far, but I like the idea.

Anyhoo, a few notes from a constituent to mull over as you settle in.

Flag