Engineering w/o school 8

[sr20ser]

Here is the situation that I am in. I worked for the company I am at now about two years ago. I started at the bottom, material handler, and worked my way up to being a "Laser Technician". I was laid off, and called back about a year later. I am now the "Production Engineer" and do all the CAD work and all the programming for the lasers at our company. I have not had any schooling in this area, I went to a welding school.

What's the opinion on getting hired at another company for engineering. Is exerience worth anything without a degree?
-Tim

 

[BJC]

SR20ser
Several people have encouraged you to go to school or take classes. I will give you the same advice I have given lots of people in your situation.
If you start somekind of engineering program in four years it will be 2009.
If you don't start somekind of a program in four years it will be 2009.
In 2009 you'll look back and reflect on what you did. That's the time to reflect, the time to decide is now.

 

[IRstuff]

The bottom line is that your company knows what value you bring to the table and may feel justified in calling you "engineer" or "Grand Poobah."

However, any other company will probably not be so inclined, since they haven't seen your work.

Regardless of the perceived "worth" of a degree, most companies use that as the minimum standard to determine whether they hire you as an engineer.

TTFN

 

[svanels]

Anyone ever heard of the term "field engineer"? (not an official tittle in my company)

Buyer to me: "I found a rental crane to do that job next week, these are the specs.."

Me: Looks good but I want to see it first, together with HSE, combine it with the safety inspection.

Buyer on the phone:.. I will send my field engineers to evaluate your equipment..

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[xnuke]

svanels,

It's a pretty common title. Field engineering is often not engineering work. It is usually technician-level work. Installing and starting up equipment, troubleshooting broken equipment, etc. all fall under the realm of field engineering. Sometimes this is called field service engineering or customer support engineering. There is typically no design in this sort of work.

xnuke
"Do you think you used enough dynamite there, Butch?"
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[IRstuff]

Field engineers generally fall into two classes, the one mentioned above as being essentially repair and maintenance engineer AND the other being essentially an applications engineer, e.g., someone who determine the best fit between the available products and the application intended by the customer.

While the latter has some elements of design, it's at a very superficial level.

While I likewise have some hesitation to calling a field engineer a "true" engineer, a field engineer does have elements of being an engineer, e.g.:

>> The troubleshooting aspect of the work can entail detailed knowledge of engineering principles and application of some modicum of skill on the part of the FE.

>> The analysis of the situation to determine whether the equipment is being misused or misapplied likewise requires some engineering skill.

>> The general lack of direct supervision and autonomony is usually considered to be a measure of the distinction from being a technician or even a junior engineer.

This puts the FE somewhere in between a classical technician and the typical engineer.

Some that work both the maintance and applications are sometimes referred to as field application engineers, FAEs.

TTFN

 

[Ron]

One of the reasons most state boards preclude the use of the term "Engineer" by non-engineers or unlicensed engineers, is that the term "Engineer" implies greater knowledge, greater responsibility, and instills greater confidence when used in the public realm, thus calling one an "Engineer" sounds more distinguished than "technician" or some other term. Technicians called "Engineers" are easier to "sell" to the public than technicians who are called "technicians", particularly when they carry the title, have no license, have no ethical responsibility, and perform perfunctory tasks of trades or labor, thus are charged at significantly lower rates.

I charge for my time at a rate much higher than a technician. My clients generally understand why.

The Tick is exactly right.

 

[FalsePrecision]

I still think certain posts above are missing the point. sr20ser is being called an engineer, for the purpose of in-house job description. He is not being advertised to the public (or a client) as an engineer. If the logic of certain posts above is true, then the concept of "railroad engineers" is contrary to your beliefs.

 

[IRstuff]

In the context of modern law, a "railrosd engineer" has no legal basis, particularly if that individual is NOT involved with the design and construction of railroad infrastructure.

TTFN

 

[BJC]

Most state laws say you have to be registered in accordance with their statues to practice engineering ( also defined in their codes). You have to be registered to use the title "Profession Engineer" , "Registered Engineer" or "PE". California for one doesn't have a catagory "railroad engineer" so I guess a person could be a "railroad engineer" the same as he/she could be a "building engineer", "operating engineer","facilities engineer", "marine engineer" "stationary engineer", "sanitation engineer" or "domestic engineer". The last two I believe have been the subject of court cases- I'm not sure of the outcome.
The word engineer in a job title evolves from a time when that job was more complicated and at the then edge of technology. Train engineers in the 19 th century may not have gone to college but the requirements of the job require more than monkey see, monkey do type work.
Many of these early jobs may have required more knowledge and responsibility than some the engineering jobs today that are held by "real" engineers.

 

[HgTX]

IRStuff--your description of what you hesitate to call a "true" engineer sounds like my job. Guess I better go turn in that engineering license.

Either that or design isn't the be-all and end-all of engineering...? Nah, couldn't be.

Hg, P.E.

 

[brainstorming]

I know one of my friends started from an operator (high school qualification) and becomes an operation manger.
How is that!
When he started his first assignment as an operator, he spent enough time for him to get used to the operation of the plant, then he decided to leave his work and go to study B.S. in che. eng.
He did go for studying and when he came back to the same plant he had worked before, he was welcomed and hired as a senior engineer. After couple of years, he has prompted to e an operation manger.
This is a real story not something I brought from my mind.

Then, I advise you to join a university (if your budget allows for that) and get the degree to get a better job.
If not possible, try to study as a part time or by correspondences (at least) to get a degree.
Personally, I started my work with B.S. degree in che. eng, at the same time I studied M.S. in che. as a part time, and fortunately I got it after 3.5 years.

Regards

 

[melone]

Ron,

Can we PLEASE stop this whole line of crap that PE's are more ethically responsible than non-PE's? That whole argument is condesending and offensive! Everyone has an ethical responsibility to perform their job functions to the best of their ability.

I will agree that PE's are more finacially responsible for their designs. And I will admit, that I can see how this will lead to safer designs (fear of losing everything they own in a lawsuit), but that does NOT make them more ethical. If you do something only because you are afraid of retribution (i.e. lawsuit), then you aren't making the choice out of some higher moral code. I always look at ethical / moral behavior as doing the right thing when noone is looking.

Please continue the debate over the value of licensing, but cut out the condensending line of baloney over ethics. It really takes away from the whole argument!

 

[brainstorming]

melone , Ron
Please stop talking away from the subject as we are anticipating better outcomes and solutions not to create barrier from reaching such targets.
back to the subject, I think sr20ser you might look for a part time programme to study further in your field or your interest while you are working to build experience >=5 years at least (normally the engineer needs 3 years to build his background and be capable to be independent)

Regards

 

[rhodie]

melone:

No disrespect intended:

A PE has the ethical prerogative to understand when designs are appropriate and when they are not. A PE has the ethical responsibility to make sure that designs are sound, and even correct unsound elements regardless of cost or delay.

A PE gains this prerogative through demonstrated training and experience. When you see "PE" by someone's name, you know that they have been exposed to, subjected to, and practiced in a highly complex level of training in sciences and maths. They don't give out "PE" stamps around for the heck of it, it really designates a level of competency.

This is not to say that on the basis of individual ability that "technicians" are subordinate to "engineers", but it does mean that in the eyes of our legal system that the "engineer" is qualified where the "technician" is not.

I agree with what Ron is saying.

 

[BobPE]

melone:

Crap is a little odd of a word to use. I would argue that PE's are more ethically (not morally) responsible since a PE can loose their license if the code of ethics governing the issuance of a license is violated. This is not to say a non-PE is any more or less ethical or that a Pe is more or less ethical, but there is no obligation for the non-PE to comply with the ethics governing PE's based on punishment.

I think this is a big deal and a major reason why we PE's all preach licensure. It also plays a big part in the original conversation, as we are trying to educate sr20ser rather than just bark back opinions.

Bob

 

[sr20ser]

Wow, i think I may have twisted some panties. I know that I am not an engineer, nor do I claim to be. I know my limitations with the work I can do. I am a damn good machinist, and a better welder. All I was asking was the chances of going to another company for some engineering type job. Engineering I am sorry to say is not a narrow field. Engineering is to me, as most, is a broad range of tasks. Some consider playing with Legos' engineering.

I was not stating that I am an engineer. I know that what I have is a comapny title and probably will not carry much weight anywhere else, all I wanted to know was "Do companies look at experience, or do they look for degrees".
-Tim

 

[sr20ser]

Wow, i think I may have twisted some panties. I know that I am not an engineer, nor do I claim to be. I know my limitations with the work I can do. I am a damn good machinist, and a better welder. All I was asking was the chances of going to another company for some engineering type job. Engineering I am sorry to say is not a narrow field. Engineering is to me, as most, is a broad range of tasks. Some consider playing with Legos' engineering.

I was not stating that I am an engineer. I know that what I have is a comapny title and probably will not carry much weight anywhere else, all I wanted to know was "Do companies look at experience, or do they look for degrees".
-Tim

BTW, yes I do plan on getting a higher education as the details are being worked out between me and the boss.

 

[FalsePrecision]

Rhodie...
Gosh, I always thought that an engineering stamp was in every 20th box of crackerjacks!

<sorry, I couldn't resist>

 

[rhodie]

sr20ser:

The answer to your question: It depends on the company.

For what it's worth, I'd rather have your skills as a machinist and welder than a PE stamp any day.

-Rhodie
EIT, but a horrible welder.

 

[BobPE]

sr20ser, dump the sexist comments, there is no room here for any of that.

We go off on tangents all the time, if what we say doesn't apply, just ignore it.

bob