Civil/Geotechnical Engineering Skills Shortages

[Patgeotech]

A recent survey undertaken in South Africa has shown that of the practicing civil engineers in the country, 70% of civil engineers are over the age of 50.

I was wondering whether this was happening in other countries and possibly what the percentages are? It would appear that there is a shift more towards the finance and business side of things.

It is my opinion that the skills shortage starts directly at university level - I have seen students becoming disillusioned with engineering and moving into other fields - the reasons for this are varied.

Also, employers do not pay too much attention to a graduate engineer (especially consultancy firms) and look for the more experienced engineer - it is understandable in the work environment, but maybe needs to be looked at again. I realise that often one tends to spend quite a bit of time training and mentoring graduates, and then they leave for greener pastures - I look at it this way, at least when they do leave they go with good practical knowledge of the field as well as a lasting impression of the company they left.

What are others opinion in terms of skills shortages?

 

[PSE]

Is there a skills shortage or just the perception of one? I always tend to be carefully skeptical about survey results. The one's related to "generational" age all seem to run on the assumption that an individual is no longer productive after a certain age and are therefore discarded from the potential labor pool. I realize that for looking at survey results you need to draw a line somewhere. Generational or age surveys I consider a lagging indicator.

I agree with you that it would be more appropriate to take a look at the university level as it is the students there which are the "new blood" in the profession. Compare that with either an increase/no change/decrease in the anticipated available positions from an economic/job market standpoint and you would in my opinion have a much better picture.

Every employer is unique in evaluating their staffing needs. If they have a suitable "blend" of junior to senior level positions, they may be less likely to hire a recent graduate. A company with a greater number of seniors might look to bring a graduate in so that they can be trained and fill an anticipated retirement. From a consultancy standpoint, I would likely think that graduates would have difficulty. A consultancy firm would have a tough sell to a client with offering them someone with little experience, even in an "apprenticeship" role. Rightly or wrongly, it would be a matter of perceived confidence in the work results.

Regards,

 

[garrettk]

What we are finding is a shortage of Civil (and particularly geotechical) engineers in the 10 to 15 (maybe a bit bigger spread?) year experience range.

I happen to be in this group and have a pretty good idea why the shortage.

When I started at University of Idaho computers, software and the internet were really starting to hit their stride with respect to growth in the industry. Many of the students that may have been civil/geotechnical engineers changed their majors to electrical engineering, software engineering, computer science and other computer related fields.

This has left a severe shortage of civil/geotech engineers within that window of time. That window follows the career paths of those that graduated in civil/geotech.

We've got plenty of entry level folks, not nearly enough mid level folks, and are just ok (could use 1 or 2 more) senior level folks at our office. This shortage seems to have effected mining engineers, as well.

 

[dougantholz]

The US has the same problem. Here's what I've taken from it. If you are smart enough to pass all of the college pre-engineering requirements (differential equations, physics, etc) you can go into a number of high tech fields. The surveys for starting salaries often show civil engineers 20-30% below chemical, computer and electrical engineering. Also, civil isn't considered very sexy and a lot of other students look down on civils as the "dumb ones". So all that being said not a lot of college students are motivated to go into the field. This should lead to a shortage of workers and hopefully an increase in salaries. This may take time.

 

[cranky108]

There is also a shortage of Power engineers as many universitys have desolved there power programs. The other side is that many employers prefer to not fill positions rather than offer more money (economics).
What is happening now is that many power companys are hiring non-power based electrical engineers, and haveing to mentor them in the power side of electrical engineering.

On the other hand we have seen many new job applicants from outside the US, which is difficult to verify there educational background. And there is a concern about the cultural differences which may irritate our customers (and owners).

Also there are shortages of technications, and linemen. Which I wonder if it is because of aging of population, no desire for those fields, more glamor of other fields, or other factors.

 

[MechEng2005]

According to the Occupational Outlook at the USA government's Buereau of Labor Statistics, growth for civil engineers will be faster than average. Engineering as a whole is expected to be at about average growth (This is for 2006-2016).

While they did not specifically say anything about the number of expected new employment or age statistics to indicate retirement, I get the impression that there will be increased demand for civil engineers, but not a severe shortage. I suspect that wages/training will not increase, but those in that field can feel pretty safe and not be too worried about being "down-sized."

-- MechEng2005

 

[moltenmetal]

It's a succession planning problem. 10-15 years ago, nobody was hiring entry-level civil grads. The grads left the profession for greener pastures and are no longer available (functional) in the labour pool as engineers.

As to the demographic shift, aging population due to retirement of the "baby boom"- even if they all retire at 65 (which they won't, since mandatory retirement rules and laws are quietly being removed/repealed), the peak of the North American baby boom won't be retiring for another 10 years, and some of the peak population years won't hit retirement age for another twenty years. The leading edge of the baby boom is just hitting retirement age. Panic at the entry level appears premature by at least a decade.

This is the same old business lobby-fed, media driven shortage hysteria that this profession has seen regularly every five to ten years from the day I began my education as an engineer until today. Every five years there's a reported shortage of some sub-discipline or another, or a new buzzword which will revolutionize industry and create a labour vacuum etc. It's hype intended to swing the supply taps open. Unfortunately when the inevitable bust comes, nobody will be there to shut the taps off again. Our inability to maintain any control on the supply side has been the reason engineers' salaries have slipped in relation to those of just about any other regulated profession over the past fifty years. It's also the reason we train and permit the immigration of vastly more engineers than the labour market could need in Canada.

Please let's see an ACTUAL shortage of engineers for a few years- maybe we can gain some of the ground back that we collectively lost relative to the doctors, lawyers, accountants and even scientists etc.

 

[theonlynamenottaken]

Just a side note: Not one "Civil" engineer has commented yet...

 

[kmatte]

Some very interesting comments. Only been in the Civil field for 5 years, so I started working in the housing boom era. So I can't comment about the lack of hiring 10-15 years ago.

One reason why there may be a shortage of Civil Engineers is because the general population has no clue what a Civil Engineer. Everytime I tell someone that I am a Civil Engineer, they get a very blank and confused look on their face and nod their head. May be 1 of 10 will actually have an idea what we do. The rest of the engineering professions have descriptive titles. I.E. structural, chemical, electrical, petroleum, and etc. That tell what kind of work you do.

If people do not know what we do, how would someone know to look at that profession for a future career. Everything we do is buried underground. If we design a pond, the home owners think it was a water amenity designed by the landscape archtects. My old roommate confirmed this, and he has an engineering degree. We were driving around Minneapolis, I pointed to some dry detention basins, and told him that I design them. He thought they were just landscaped areas.

The comment, about Civil Engineers not being a sexy, is basically true. But I think that applies to engineering as a whole. When was the last time an engineer was front and center of a project, when something did not fail. Doesn't happen too often. Engineers are like make-up artist. The movie stars get all the glory(like architects, and developers), but the make-up artist makes them look good. Like engineers make things work.

Salaries are definately a reason for fewer Civil Engineers. Who wants to work in a career with a lower starting salary, almost immediately having large responsibilities, and you do not get any glory? Sometimes, I ask myself the samething everyday. Why did I not go to business school, have a very good potential for a 6 figure salary, with little responsibility, and the ability to pass off my mistakes.

sorry, this turned into a little bit of a rant, but it kind of shows

 

[civilperson]

As a civil engineer practicing as a structural design specialist, I feel there is no shortage of civil engineers, just a lack of high paid positions in that field. As soon as the salaries are competitive, I would love to go back to grading, roads, water and waste water systems, storm runoff and surveying/construction management. The average salary will have to double for me to move back.

 

[gwynn]

kmatte

Whenever I have used the term civil engineer, I am told no engineers are civil, so maybe blank looks aren't so bad.

In my case there is a definate lack of civil engineers (including structural). But the driving factors here are the economy, ongoing seismic upgrading and some major pieces of infrastucture reaching the end of thier design/usable lives.

 

[youngstructural]

Short of members of the military, all engineers are now civil engineers. Engineering training was previously only done by the military for their own application (fortresses, weapon design, road works, etc) and the term came from engineers who started applying their specialist knowledge to civilian works.

Just as an aside, I'm a Civil Engineer (B.Eng Civil, Concentration Management), but have worked as a Structural Engineer since before I graduated... I can't think of myself as anything else anymore. I certainly don't consider myself merely a "Civil" anymore than an Aeronautical would.

Cheers,

YS

B.Eng (Carleton)
Working in New Zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...

 

[DonPhillips]

Another civil here - who evolved into a more of a jack of all trades.


Don Phillips

http://worthingtonengineering.com

 

[csd72]

There is a definate shortage in Australia and the UK at the moment, I am seeing packages advertised that we would have only dreamed about 5 years ago. Hopefully it lasts!

 

[HgTX]

I didn't go into civil engineering my first time through college because the face of CivE that was presented at the intro level was sewers and roadbeds and traffic control, and I didn't want sewers and roadbeds and traffic control. I wanted big suspension bridges, but knew that wasn't a realistic career goal. Just as garrettk described, I followed the siren call of computer science, then shifted into other stuff for several years until I finally figured out where my interests and civil engineering intersected.

Had I understood from the beginning the full breadth of what civil engineers really do, and then stuck around the extra year for the M.Eng at my school, I'd have 17 years' experience now, rather than 9.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[csd72]

Patgeotech,

I understand the reasons why companies dont spend the money training (which by the way seems a common isssue in US,UK and Aust) in the end it is self defeating as it ends up with a shortage of skilled intermediate engineers.

I think the problem is that these places are often reluctant to give decent increases often giving a nominal increasse that barely keeps up with salary. It is a career and as such you salary is expected to increase in real terms with experience. Good firms should spend the time making sure that their salaries are competitive so that they keep their employees.

 

[GregLocock]

If the world was rational you would be right.

Sadly, it doesn't work that way. The best way to improve everyone's performance is for everybody to share knowledge and so improve the average productivity of the work team.

But if you do that then the less experienced people will improve more than the more experienced people, so they will get better pay rises.

So the logical thing to do for the experienced people is to make sure that they do not educate the kids, so that they continue to outperform them.

The organisation then reacts by making sure that the only substantial pay rises occur by promotion into management. Therefore the more experienced people will sacrifice the short term advantage of retaining private knowledge, in the hope of being recognised as a team player, and hence management material.

And that is why your boss is paid far more than you for doing less work.

Here endeth the lesson.




Cheers

Greg Locock

SIGlease see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.