Many of us are outraged when drivers (say, taxis or minibuses) are visitors from Central Asia who have poor knowledge of not only the Russian language, but also violate the elementary rules of safety and traffic. Abroad, it almost never happens that a taxi driver asks the client how to get to the specified address. Why? Because in most countries, in order to get a license for private transportation, you need to pass exams not only in driving, but also in knowledge of the city. Now imagine what would happen if a half-educated doctor asked the patient how to better treat him?
Or did the civil engineer not comply (ignorance) with the norms and standards? It is in order to make our lives safer, and there is legal support for professional activities. The bottom line is to legally determine the norms and criteria that a professional must meet in order to be considered such.
However, the legal support of professional activities is designed not only to prevent hackers and under-graduates from entering the labor market. Legal norms - as a regulator of public relations - are created and improved to protect professionals. At the same time, each industry has its own codes, licensing principles, and legal provisions. Indeed, for example, the risk to life and health when performing certain types of professional activity is different: if a doctor works with infectious patients, then he must be provided with conditions for protecting his health. And the teacher is supposed to have such a load and a vacation that allows them to prepare for lessons and psychological recovery.
In a number of countries (including Russia), the standards of legal support for professional activities are constantly being reviewed. For example, if earlier you could be a guide-translator only after completing special courses and obtaining a license, now access to the profession has been greatly simplified. This is done so that the legal regulation of professional activity does not turn into a tool for creating caste.
It is no secret that in every industry where licensing is required, there is a danger of a biased and selective approach. It is not by chance that such professions as a lawyer, a notary public, a pharmacist often become “dynastic”, not because their parents' abilities are even more pronounced, but because access to the profession is not free. To become a lawyer, it is not enough just to graduate from the law faculty. You need to complete an internship, study a specialization and pass an exam. Unfortunately, often this cannot be done without “connections” and “acquaintances”. That is, on the one hand, the legal support of professional activity protects the interests of society, and on the other, it becomes an instrument for creating "narrow circles" of influential people who will try to prevent "strangers" from the "bread" profession. The undoubted advantage of having a regulator is that the candidate will be carefully checked before receiving a license or certificate. The undoubted minus is that, as in any social relations, here too one cannot avoid subjectivity, bias or nepotism.
And this sometimes gives rise to paradoxical situations. For example, there are cases when imposters without relevant diplomas and education successfully engaged in professional activities for several years.
If such a lawyer wins the case, then he, of course, violates the law - but what is the matter with the clients? Or another example: in the West, in order to become a sworn translator, you must pass a serious exam and obtain a license, and, in addition, be a citizen of a given country. But, alas, the very receipt of a license is not tantamount to a truly thorough knowledge of the language. And often translations made by such specialists have to be corrected and adjusted. The question naturally arises of improving the procedures and criteria for licensing professional activities. And the legal support of professional activities is an area that should be paid attention not only to lawmakers, but also to civil society activists.