Call for consistency in licensing and registration
The National Competition Council is reviewing Australia’s mutual recognition schemes, including both registration of engineers and licensing of trades.
Inconsistent licensing and registration of workers across borders has long been an issue in Australia, particularly in the building and construction industry. For both engineers and trades, different rules in different states add extra cost and complexity to projects.
Push for productivity
In 2025, the Productivity Commission undertook a national competition policy analysis that explored how licensing reform could promote occupational mobility. Although a national occupational licence for trades including HVAC&R and electrical was considered, the final report recommended reviewing Australia’s mutual recognition system instead.
The mutual recognition system, in theory, allows licensed and registered workers to more easily practice their profession in other jurisdictions by removing need for further assessment of their qualifications, skills or experience. In reality, the current system is weakened by discrepancies between regimes.
The Commonwealth government has now tasked the National Competition Council with reviewing Australia’s mutual recognition schemes for workers. The process will be rapid – the consultation closes at the end of March 2026, and recommendations will be shared in April.
The review will consider the impact, effectiveness and implementation of current mutual recognition arrangements. The National Competition Council will report on a broad range of issues, including how mutual recognition schemes promote labour mobility and workforce flexibility, how workers are made aware of requirements across state borders, and opportunities for new technologies or processes to reduce costs while improving safety, quality and employment outcomes.
According to the consultation paper, the findings will provide an evidence base to identify solutions that strengthen, streamline or replace current arrangements. This includes the Australian government’s commitment to a national approach to occupational licensing for engineering and trades.
Advocating for harmonisation
Engineers Australia has strongly supported consistent arrangements for registration of engineers. Late last year, CEO Romilly Madew AO said a national scheme would enhance public safety and cut red tape.
“A national scheme for engineers would streamline regulation, improve safety outcomes and help Australia meet its future infrastructure and workforce needs,” Madew said.
AIRAH is also supporting harmonisation of schemes across the country – for both engineers and technicians.
“With a single driver’s licence you can travel around Australia,” says AIRAH CEO Sami Zheng, Affil. AIRAH. “It should be similarly straightforward for engineers and technicians working across borders.
“Running our approved APER accreditation scheme for engineers in four different jurisdictions, we see first hand how inconsistencies across borders create obstacles and increase costs, and we see the opportunity for improvement.”
To inform the review, AIRAH is asking members and professionals in the HVAC&R sector to share their experiences with mutual recognition schemes.
“We would like to hear from both engineers and technicians about how you and your businesses have been impacted,” says AIRAH Advocacy and Policy Manager Mark Vender.
“Whether it’s extra costs, lost opportunities, or just additional paperwork – all of this is important information for the National Competition Council and will strengthen the case for national consistency.”
To provide input to AIRAH’s consultation response, please contact advocacy@airah.org.au.
PREV
NEXT
Comments
-
Dear AIRAH Team,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback and comments regarding the engineer registration, from a mechanical engineering perspective.
I totally agree, the current arrangements are no efficient and differ from State to State. This is leading to a loss of productivity, unnecessary expensive and time inefficiencies.
I wish to offer some real-life examples as part of my experience that I have encountered thus far since the State based registration scheme has come into force.
When collaborating with engineers and HVAC contractors in other smaller states and Territories (SA, WA, NT), they are not even aware that Registration is now mandatory and legislated in other eastern States.
This is leading to inconsistent approach to the way projects are design and managed across the Nation.
For those of us that are registered, the paperwork and administration demanded by the States is excessive and expensive. More unnecessary bureaucracy.In Victoria for example, the BLA demand that mechanical engineers hold their own personal professional indemnity insurance, which costs anywhere between $1500 – $2000 per year for an individual engineer. The feedback I am obtaining from registered mechanical engineers in the State of Victoria is that this cost is unaffordable and the requirement needs to be omitted. In every case, the employer offers PI for each of their registered engineering employees, however the BLA reject this level of company-based PI insurance and insist individual insurance is obtained.
There is also double up in terms of continuing professional development (CPD) requirements. At State level, they require each registered engineer to demonstrate minimum CPD hours are undertaken each year, which seems to be a double up from what is required from industry registration from AIRAH (APER) and Engineers Australia (NER), as an example. The industry registration CPD requirements should be sufficient proof at any level of State requirements, without further double ups.
These examples highlight why I support a unified national engineering registration system to improve productivity and reduce inefficiencies. I hope this provides insight into current issues at the State level. Thank you.
-
I agree total with Vince.
That is why I retired, it is all too hard.
-
-
I worked as a professional engineer for over 50 years both as an employee and consulting engineer.
I have been a member of AIRAH for over 43 years, I. E. Aust for over 45 years and a registered plumber for over 35 years.
My engineering roles required me to work in every state and territory of Australia to design, supervise installation and maintain building services. The building services included HVAC, wet and dry fire services including smoke management, vertical transportation (lifts, hoists and escalators), commercial refrigeration, commercial kitchens and bakeries, architectural and coolroom panel construction and warehouse racking and material handling systems.
My other roles during the past 50 years included Senior Project Manager and Senior Development Manager for Shopping Centres and Supermarkets.
In 2023, after 50years of continuous work in the building services and construction industry (and still wanting to continue to work), the new regulator framework limited the disciplines in which I could work and the states in which I could operate, because the regulatory authorities set engineering qualification and specialised training requirements that did not exist in 1973 and did not recognise my prior work as a professional engineer. Professional indemnity insurance also became more narrowly defined to a single discipline and this further limited the work that I could undertake.
I did consider upgrading my qualifications through post graduate courses. To continue doing the same work I had successfully undertaken for over 40 years, would require me to study full time for several years. The was no alternative pathway to gain recognition of this work experience. I. E. Aust was the only pathway I could use to gain recognition of my 1973 professional engineering qualification for Professional Engineering registration in Victoria.
It all became too hard to contribute to the industry I have loved to work in for so long, so I retired and changed all my memberships to ‘retired’ or ‘not working’.
I also know of a number of others in my situation. The loss of engineering expertise is in part because of the narrowly defined and poorly implemented regulatory framework for engineers, technicians and trades. This has meant that older multi disciplined engineers, technicians and trades can no longer contribute to the industry as they have in the past nor provide the mentoring for young engineers, technician and trades. -
If the Refrigeration HVAC&R trade is to be made a nationally recognised license “and it should ” will this new licensing be protected from all the powerful outside interests of other trades, unions and those that would like to lord over the Refrigeration HVAC&R industry for their own benefit.
New licensing of the Refrigeration HVAC&R trade will be a mind field to step through as has been shown over the many years. The sharks will be demanding their piece of the trade.
COAG tried to get this over the line once before in the early 90’s but was hijacked by powerful outside interest groups.Good luck and strength to the arm of the Refrigeration trade.
-
In my opinion licences were strengthened and revised in other trades to keep refrigeration technicians truly showcasing their own unique skills across these other trades.
It is well and truly time for change to licensing and recognition for the HVACR trade, and if that involves mutual recognition with other trades then let’s get on with it!
Advertisements
Recent news
- General sweetens the deal on ducted systems
- Honeywell releases new gas sensor for high-risk environments
- ASHRAE calls for abstracts for 2027 Winter Conference
Latest events
- ASHRAE calls for abstracts for 2027 Winter Conference
- ARBS 2026 Awards finalists announced
- Program confirmed for REB26 at the MCG
Leave a Reply to Reg Binding Cancel reply