I've worked as an engineer at HP for many years and have had the pleasure to work with some extraordinarily smart and talented technicians. Many of them got their degrees while employed and moved up to engineering positions here or elsewhere. However, many technicians prefer not to become engineers, even if they are fully aware of the fact that they are smarter and more productive than some of the engineers (a not-uncommon situation).
I think one of the reasons is that in a technician role your role and responsibilities are more clearly defined as a tech and project failure is generally blamed on the engineers. Also, there's less clerical overhead and more hands-on work when working as a tech.
I got to talking with a power line crew as we waited for the utility to give the go-ahead to fix downed lines in our neighborhood.
They felt the utility engineering personnel had very little comprehension of how the field work was actually done, and complained they got direction that made little or no sense. And they made a lot more than the engineers, though they had to travel the country and work long hours to do so. These guys were licensed and came through a certification program, but had little or no college.
They allowed that the engineers had much better theoretical knowledge, but were so divorced from the realities of the work as to be basically useless in disaster recovery.
Power line crews are often very well paid to compensate for the fact that there is a real risk of serious injury or death.
Engineers usually work under more controlled conditions, but I know electrical engineers who consider the power line guys insane for the risks they take and wouldn't trade with them.
I think one of the reasons is that in a technician role your role and responsibilities are more clearly defined as a tech and project failure is generally blamed on the engineers. Also, there's less clerical overhead and more hands-on work when working as a tech.