This was an argument between myself and Ken McTernian, I think that was his name, that started twelve years ago. I see nothing has changed. The AMT title has absolutely nothing backing it. My argument was that any idiot off the street can be an AMT simply because the guidelines of being called an AMT is so broad and there in no type of training or education required to have the title bestowed upon someone working in the industry. It's has become a mainstream title in the industry but other than doing some form of maintenance task in the industry you are considered an AMT. That is dangerous for the industry. Especially considering the ones that went through the trouble of earning their A&P. How many people do you know that are working as an AMT that does not hold an A&P certificate making the same money as you? I ran across this on several occasions. MRO's are required to have, not exactly sure of the numbers, let's say one A&P for every ten uncertified AMT's. Yet the A&P certified mechanics made the same as the uncertified AMT's and everyone was considered an AMT. Ken didn't seem to see an issue with this hopefully you can see the dangers in this. Here's an example for you. This MRO would bring in a bunch of guys in from the local Manpower office. All they did was pull out the seats and change the seat covers then assist in the reintallation of the seats. They were considered AMT's even though it was the first time some had set foot on an aircraft. I told Ken that if he wanted to replace the A&P term with AMT that would be fine but to quit pushing a term that has no real meaning.