That is, unless you treat the agents as if they were people and thus the true engineers, of course. I think that's a fascinating philosophical topic despite ultimately disagreeing, but to say the least it's incredibly controversial to even consider the personhood of agents, much less endorse it.
This is all moot anyway, so apologies if I'm rude or overly dismissive of your comment that I agree with the general thrust of. No point starting fights over deck chairs...
The title "software engineer" is just a bullshit name that sounds more important - for the same task. Very few programmers work like real-world engineers. There is no licensure or liablity, there is no legal code. If a real-world engineer makes a mistake in a design that causes structural failure, they're on the hook.
We sure added lots of processes and practices to make it seem like we're more diligent about what we're doing, but none of these are empirically verified (or verifiable in practical terms).
I would disagree that "the grievances" are not fundemantel. The _profession_ of the programmer is about to cease to exist, much like the human computer. Sure, you can still compute without a computer and perhaps enjoy it, but you will not find anyone to pay you to do it. Whatever you think "babysitting an LLM" is, it's not programming, even if presumably programmers are fairly well suited for it.