ccnl level and tasks

[New Rider]

Good evening to you,

I open this topic to ask, perhaps to those with some years of experience in technical offices as head office/project or similar but also to others, what is generally required as preparation or otherwise as technical capacity of the employee according to the level of framing on the national contract. For example (to be clearer) a technical employee of the level will have certain skills or however knowledge that cannot be compared with a level employee and so on.
I hope to have been clear in formulating my doubt....

Good evening. .

 

[meccanicamg]

to say the truth at the practical level does not center much in category picture and not even the salary.

important companies look for technicians, junior and senior engineers where there are people capable of managing alone or almost everything, from contact with the customer to management suppliers, design, testing.

in companies a little more human, there is need to know the tools of modeling, know how to make sensible accounts and reasoning and dimensioning, have a little aesthetic, know how to save.

generally the figures are two: designer who is the tirarighe with little experience and/or with little design skills that interfaces with the designer and the ut manager then there is the designer who independently decides components, strategies, calculates, analyzes and relates to the commissioned head as well as to the ut manager.

we need people awake, collaborative and inventive. it would serve a little less theory and in a little more tied where to learn to understand from the mistakes in the workshop that certain things should not be done like this.

 

[numero1]

to say the truth at the practical level does not center much in category picture and not even the salary.

important companies look for technicians, junior and senior engineers where there are people capable of managing alone or almost everything, from contact with the customer to management suppliers, design, testing.

therefore important companies are not "human"

in companies a little more human, there is need to know the tools of modeling, know how to make sensible accounts and reasoning and dimensioning, have a little aesthetic, know how to save.

:finger:

generally the figures are two: designer who is the tirarighe with little experience and/or with little design skills that interfaces with the designer and the ut manager then there is the designer who independently decides components, strategies, calculates, analyzes and relates to the commissioned head as well as to the ut manager.

slowly, on the 2 figures I agree too, but experienced designers give points to designers.........

we need people awake, collaborative and inventive. it would serve a little less theory and in a little more tied where to learn to understand from the mistakes in the workshop that certain things should not be done like this.

:finger:

 

[Vmax]

from the contractual point of view here:http://www.contrattometalmeccanici.it/s4_t2_a1.htmlfind very detailed tasks and requirements for each contractual level.
here instead:http://www.contrattometalmeccanici.it/index.htmlfind the corresponding contractual minimums.

as to practical considerations, the designer, the junior designer, the senior designer, but also the calculationist, the boss, the chief technical office, etc., find placement in the table above.

in the common practice, I repeat that companies tend to "forget" this beautiful table, framing employees at levels lower than due. bad strategy: when employees realize (and always realize) the companies are obliged by law to reframe the employee to the correct level, and to correspond all the differences on previous salaries plus interests, and to pay a penalty.

 

[Vmax]

mechanicalmg, I always follow with pleasure your interventions always punctual and precise, and I hope one day to see published also your compendium of formulas for engineering, you will allow me here a small ot.
We all agree that it serves people awake, collaborative and inventive.
We also agree that the designer benefited from following the construction in the workshop of the pieces, at least occasionally.
That's a little less theory.
and for at least two reasons:
- without good theoretical bases it is likely to make design only 'baldassini and catalogs', which goes well for charity 90% of the times, but you will converge it is not much innovative, and then when you go to do, for example, considerations of verification and optimization to fatigue the people look at you as if you were talking about hyperuranium, except then discover, for example, that their clients in germany require these checks as standard of supply.
- the second reason has to do with the growing multidisciplinaryity of the design teams. when you have to communicate with each other who deals with mechanics, who of fluid dynamics and transmission of heat, who of drives, you need a common cultural base, that can not be the experience in the workshop.

considering the fold that took our engineering faculties with the various reforms I would not further encourage the decay of theory. They both need.

 

[numero1]

in the common practice, I repeat that companies tend to "forget" this beautiful table, framing employees at levels lower than due. bad strategy: when employees realize (and always realize) the companies are obliged by law to reframe the employee to the correct level, and to correspond all the differences on previous salaries plus interests, and to pay a penalty.

No... in theory yes, but in practice it can go (not always) differently.