Yes, provided the duties actually described are the practice of a listed profession and the qualification for that listing is met. The internal title is not decisive, but a title that hides the profession makes the application harder than it needs to be, so the letter should be rewritten before it is presented.
The duties decide it; the title only creates or removes friction
The assessment at the port of entry runs from Appendix 2 outward. The officer looks for a profession on the list, then for the qualification that listing prescribes, then for evidence that the work in question is that profession's work. A letter headed Senior Product Owner forces the officer to reconstruct the profession from the body of the text, and a reconstruction can go the wrong way. The practical fix costs nothing: ask the employer for a letter that states the position is an engineering role, describes engineering duties in concrete terms, and notes the internal administrative title separately if payroll requires it. Bring the degree and transcript that satisfy the Engineer listing. Nothing about this changes the legal test; it only stops a correct application from looking like a doubtful one.
Hypothetical example: a cartographic technician receives a data-strategist offer whose daily duties are map production and spatial analysis. The review should decide the cited profession, actual duties, and prescribed qualification, using the offer, degree, transcript, and any required licence. Ask for the missing primary record before selecting a filing or travel step. The usual error is that a high salary or modern job title cannot correct duties that identify another occupation. Put the conclusion in a dated fact sheet so later changes in duties, ownership, or qualification remain visible.