Fined by the city for claiming to be an engineer - Suing on grounds of free speech 62

[Terratek]

This article popped up in my google feed. I thought it was interesting, a little funny and a little ridiculous.

http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2017/04/beaverton_man_claims_oregon_st.html

Being familiar with licensing laws, and being an engineer, I agree with the city. I can see how easily a lay person could buy the spin, though.

 

[JNieman]

If he's suing on the grounds of civil rights, and is heard, and a ruling is made, that's exactly what a precedent is, and exactly what future cases can base judgment upon.

Again - the Oregon board made it into more than simply an issue of whether or not he's a licensed engineer. They made it into an issue of what constitutes performing engineering work which requires a license, and quite broadly overstated their case, imo.

 

[JAE]

JNieman - I am in the general view that the guy was fined for only claiming to be an engineer when he was not licensed.

But in reading your posted quote there it sets up an important question.

I can see on one hand that the state could come in and fine the guy for his claim as an engineer. Whether it SHOULD be "engineer" or "Professional Engineer" can be debated.

However, most states that I am licensed in (and I used to be in Oregon) limit the PRACTICE of engineering to cases where the person is trying to get employed and make money as a consultant of some sort....i.e. holding oneself out to the public for hire.

In this case, the guy doesn't appear to have been hoping to get paid for anything - just expressing an opinion on an engineering issue.

I would then agree that a state denying someone's ability to state an opinion is wrong, engineering or otherwise, where the person is just talking, vs. promoting for hire.
So is the "Practice of Engineering" only truly a regulated activity if there is paid compensation or the hope of paid compensation as an engineer?

So in summary, if you are not licensed:
Holding yourself out to be an engineer to the public - illegal
Holding yourself out to be an engineer for hire - illegal
Expressing an engineering opinion in an effort to secure engineering work - illegal
Expressing an engineering opinion with no hiring or monetary compensation anticipated - legal...free speech






Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[SandCounter]

It appears Oregon law is very aggressive on the matter, allowing fewer exceptions to the use of "engineer" and "the practice of engineering" than found in other states. One key exception I wish he took advantage of is 672.060(9)(b).

https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors672.html[/URL]]
672.060 Exceptions to application of ORS 672.002 to 672.325. ORS 672.002 to 672.325 do not apply to the following:
. . .
(9) An individual, firm, partnership or corporation offering to practice engineering, land surveying or photogrammetric mapping if:
. . .
(b) The offer includes a written statement that the offeror is not registered to practice engineering, land surveying or photogrammetric mapping in the State of Oregon, but will comply with ORS 672.002 to 672.325 by having an individual holding a valid certificate of registration in this state in responsible charge of the work prior to performing any engineering, land surveying or photogrammetric mapping work within this state.

If it were me, after the first warning from the board, I would have researched the law and responded with an apology and asked for guidance in selecting a valid certificate holder, or taken the position that my correspondence was in an effort to secure responsible charge services. It sounds like he had garnered significant support from the engineering community, "hiring" a professional to work his numbers and take responsible charge seems to be the path of least resistance.

I used to count sand. Now I don't count at all.

 

[IRstuff]

I not disagreeing with the notion that the state should not create a monopoly on engineering calculations, but that is what's in probably any state's PE law, and is therefore going to be protected by the NCEES and other organizations with vested interest in maintaining the status quo. The Board, however, has overstepped its authority in one regard, because the acts in question don't violate the law, as written

672.005 Additional definitions. As used in ORS 672.002 to 672.325, unless the context requires otherwise:
(1) “Practice of engineering” or “practice of professional engineering” means doing any of the following:
(a) Performing any professional service or creative work requiring engineering education, training and experience.
(b) Applying special knowledge of the mathematical, physical and engineering sciences to such professional services or creative work as consultation, investigation, testimony, evaluation, planning, design and services during construction, manufacture or fabrication for the purpose of ensuring compliance with specifications and design, in connection with any public or private utilities, structures, buildings, machines, equipment, processes, works or projects.

Since the lights already are past "construction, manufacture or fabrication" his analysis does not violate subparagraph b. His claim that he is an "excellent engineer" and that he's qualified to do the analysis does violate other parts of the law.

Obviously, no one has really probed the wording, since it implies that even stating that he has a degree in (electrical) engineering violates subparagraph c in this section. There's plenty of bad grammar in the law, and should have a complete re-write to clarify the scope of "or" used in various parts of the law.

672.007 Acts constituting practice of engineering, land surveying or photogrammetric mapping. For purposes of ORS 672.002 to 672.325:
(1) A person is practicing or offering to practice engineering if the person:
(a) By verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, card or in any other way implies that the person is or purports to be a registered professional engineer;
(b) Through the use of some other title implies that the person is an engineer or a registered professional engineer; or
(c) Purports to be able to perform, or who does perform, any service or work that is defined by ORS 672.005 as the practice of engineering.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[JNieman]

I hope all the Oregon high school physics teachers are registered engineers

 

[JAE]

JNieman...good one!

IRstuff...I think you missed the word "any" in 672.005(1) and "or" in (1)(b).
It doesn't have to be during construction so if it is after construction you would still be violating the Oregon statute.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[stevenal]

I agree the definition of the practice of engineering is a bit grey and seems to cross into some other professions. Note however, that Jarlstrom is not arguing that he was not engaged in the practice. By referring to himself as an engineer, he admitted to practicing while unlicensed.

 

[IRstuff]

The "any" refers to a) or b) or the others I didn't include, and not to parsing below the subparagraphs.

which "or" in b) are you referring to? 1st, 2nd, or 3rd?

My parse:
Applying [blah] to such professional services or creative work as [blah] during [construction, manufacture or fabrication] for the purpose of ensuring compliance with specifications and design, in connection with any [blah].

So any professional services or creative work that's NOT during [construction, manufacture or fabrication] seems fair game.

professional service or creative work is problematic
Does "professional" apply to [service or creative work] or is it [professional service] or [creative work]. I take it to be the former


TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[JAE]

IRstuff...I think I take it to be the latter. I've never heard of the term "professional creative work" in an engineering law context.

Me trying to boil it down visually:

[blue]“Practice of engineering” means doing any of the following:[/blue]
Then it lists (a) and (b) so any of either (a) or (b) so I agree with you there.

[blue](b)Applying special knowledge of the ... (various) ... engineering sciences to such professional services or creative work as
consultation
investigation
testimony
evaluation
planning
design
and
services during construction, manufacture or fabrication for the purpose of ensuring compliance with specifications and design[/blue]
Note that this whole last line makes sense as one unit.
[blue]
in connection with any public or private
utilities
structures
buildings
machines
equipment
processes
works
or
projects.[/blue]

So the [blue]"services during construction"[/blue] doesn't apply to this particular case since the traffic system was already in place.
But the investigation and evaluation part does.

And in the second part this is definitely a public utility/equipment so that applies as well.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[1gibson]

As much as bed yellow light timing irritates me, I'd just put infrared LED's around my license plates so the camera can't see them, and move on.

 

[Terratek]

All of this interesting debate and I just realized I miss-spelled speech in the title.

I'm an:

Enginere
Ingineer
Enginer

I'm good at math.

 

[SandCounter]

Let's just be careful about how insistent we are about interpretation of the law; the Oregon State Bar may be monitoring this thread.

I used to count sand. Now I don't count at all.

 

[JNieman]

The most effective way to get a bad law overturned is to start enforcing it.

 

[JAE]

"...the Oregon State Bar may be monitoring this thread."

I heard they have their own SWAT team.

Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[bridgebuster]

Politicians are always looking for new ways to raise money.

I wonder what would happen if one of the pinheads who fined Järlström had a medical emergency in a restaurant, would people yell "is there a doctor in the house" or "is there an Oregon licensed doctor in the house"? If only a non-Oregon doctor were present, would he refuse the service?

 

[msquared48]

BB:

In that is the conundrum: Both medical doctors and structural engineers deal with life safety issues. Go figure...

Actually, service would not be refused due to the Good Samaritan law... unless there are no Good Samaritans in Oregon.

Mike McCann, PE, SE (WA)

 

[IRstuff]

While "services during construction, manufacture or fabrication for the purpose of ensuring compliance with specifications and design" may make sense as a unit, it's absurdly unbalanced in the context of the paragraph. Particularly since the items before this are also needed "for the purpose of ensuring compliance with specifications and design."

Moreover, the entirety of PE law is "for the purpose of ensuring compliance with specifications and design," since that's what ensures public safety, which is the ostensible goal of the law.

Otherwise, even ignoring what we do here, every student in college doing engineering is in violation of the law, as parsed that way, as are the professors.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[hokie66]

I think a lot of us would be violating the Oregon state law by our participation in Eng-Tips. If I ever visit, I will try to keep my mouth shut.

 

[JAE]

But Eng-Tips Isn't in Oregon. It's a place in Cyber Heaven!!


Check out Eng-Tips Forum's Policies here:
faq731-376

 

[IRstuff]

We don't know where all those electrons have been, do we?

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm