If not an engineer then what (& role of non-PE's) 38

[Binary]

As stated in the "Where's the respect" thread, I'd like to explore a couple of things:
[ol][li]In the view of some PE's, unlicensed engineers are neither professionals nor "real" engineers.
If that's true, then what are we? Many of us have worked far too long and had too much success to be considered interns, apprentices, or trainees. Many of us have graduate degrees and advanced theoretical and applied knowledge. We're something and I'd like to understand what people who hold the "not pro, not real" viewpoint think. [/li]
[li]Related to that is what you believe to be the role of the unlicensed "engineer." Acknowledging that there are many of us working under the industrial exemption, what is our role in the current structure?[/li][/ol]
My view is that we are professionals and we are *real* engineers. (BTW, if I'm not a professional then how come I'm an exempt employee?)

I see the role of the non-PE as doing whatever engineering work needs to be done for which one has the knowledge/skills/experience to do. I see the PE as the one who provides the oversight and approves whatever critical pieces of a project there are.

This is very simplistic, I know, and I'm eagerly awaiting input from those of you who understand this much better than I do.

I sincerely appreciate the time and energy you choose to put into discussing this. I, for one, will benefit greatly from the discourse.

 

[melone]

BobPE,

I don't want this to degrade to a personal attack, but your statement about "if not a PE then what", is probably the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. How about requiring every engineer to get their pilot's license? The crux of your argument is based on the premise that something (no matter how arbitrary) is better than nothing at all. Would having the Nazi regimn in control be better than having no government? Get real!

Also, please try to refrain from smug comments. They do not help your argument, and are becoming offensive. I enjoy a spirited debate, but telling me, and everybody else that doesn't agree with you, that we cannot see the big picture, and that we are sheep following the herd, indicates that you are less interested in changing peoples opinions, and more interested in slamming people. I try to use analogies to test theories (if the theory holds at the extreme, then it is probably a pretty good theory), but I don't get that impression from your posts. If I have misinterpreted your intentions, then please accept my most humble apologies!!!

 

[rhodie]

I guess being a PE doesn't help the spelling skills any, does it, Bob?

(Cheap shot artist = rhodie) )

 

[BobPE]

melone:

I accept your apologies....LOL

BobPE

 

[brad]

Bob,
As someone who (1) generally shares your view; and (2) is a licensed PE (hence has little reason to take personal offense to your comments) I have to agree with Melone.

You're not doing a lot to advance the agenda of, nor others' opinions of, your PE brethren.

I would encourage a little more diplomacy in your posts if you are actually intending to win over converts.
Brad

 

[buzzp]

I think a consensus should be able to be reached by now. Let us see if everyone can agree with the following (if you can't agree on these by now after all of this discussion then this is a hopeless argument amongst those that choose to participate):
1. There are many engineering careers that do not require nor would benefit from obtaining a PE license (as the licensing procedure stands now)
2. A PE license MAY open up doors for future endeavors
3. An engineer without a PE license is still an engineer
4. An engineer without a PE can still be a highly respected engineer in their field
5. A PE license will likely improve your standing with other engineers outside of your present position (people that dont know you). But does this matter to you?

Can we all agree on the above?

 

[melone]

I would agree with BUZZP's post.....

 

[BobPE]

buzzp:

one thing I want to add, PE's are influencing and authoring laws that impact non PE practice of engineering.

BobPE

 

[patdaly]

And I will go along with buzzp, one thing I wish to add is let us find a way to keep busybodies from ruining the advantage American industry has by employing the finest minds they can find, not the most degreed!

 

[buzzp]

BobPE,
There are also non PE's that influence the law as well. To think differently, is nonsense. I am sure you were not trying to say that only PE's in the engineering world have any influence on the law. If they did, we would all be required to have it by now
And who would influence the standards, etc, that us product design engineers have to follow? Likely, PhD's, MSEE, and EE's with experience and not just PE's because PE's in the product design world are extremely rare. I agree that PE's have some influence (questionable whether they actually author the law except for the occasional politician that happens to carry a PE) over the law that affects PE's (consultants) but have little influence over standards that a product design engineer uses in the design world. Our world is more influenced by experience and reputation of degreed engineers (PE or not).

 

[Binary]

I dunno how much this adds to the dialog but our State Board of Engineering is half-populated by non-PE's and that's by charter.

I guess they're looking for as broad a perspective as possible.

 

[BobPE]

To speak in a court of law on engineering, one needs to be a PE, but that is not what I am saying. PE's are influencing laws that govern the practice of non-PE's. Of course, non-PE's influence laws. But the point I was trying to make was that PE's are striving to make the PE a benchmark for all engineers. Now this may or may not impact members here or other engineers that are not members, but it will impact many.

I guess my goal here is to put writing on the wall, those who choose to read it, great, those that don't, great too.

I have yet to read any good reason not to get a PE. So I keep chugging along with this thread.

BobPE

 

[brad]

Bob,
You are definitively wrong in the statement "...to speak in a court of law on engineering ...". I know of several engineering expert witnesses who have testified under oath in civil cases who were not PE's.

I have a personal acquaintance whose livelihood is entirely in the realm of expert witness and accident reconstruction. When I found he didn't have a PE, I was surprised. Apparently few people in his particular field of expert witnesses carry PE's.

Brad

 

[BobPE]

yea bradh, that would be against the law, unless they stated they were not engineers and did not speak about engineering. I am not making a statement, I am just quoting law, so the law must be wrong? Read up on your specific state law, its there. There is a difference in being an expert and being an engineer on the stand. I have gone up against a few expert whitnesses in court, they get paid well, but have to stick to their realm of expertise which, if they are not a PE, is not engineering. Physics, like in accident reconstruction, is not engineering, so technically, anyone can be an expert in it...It's a very strange set of laws...

BobPE

 

[brad]

That's my point exactly--if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's a duck. I'll gladly trade my PE's salary for his "non-engineer" expert witness salary. To say he cannot "speak in a court of law on engineering" is only arguing semantics, which I think is the whole point in this thread. To my understanding, people in the medical field without board-certification also routinely are expert witnesses in courts of law (even though they can't practice medicine).

When you make statements such as you have made above, there is an implication that one must hold a PE to be an engineering authority in a court of law--that is simply not true. While it does keep one from saying "I'm Joe Blow, Professional Engineer" in many fields it does very little to effectively limit what one can do in a court of law.

I appreciate what the state law says, but the gray is so large in this regard that in many areas of practice it is a moot point. This is the crux of this entire thread. Your background seems to be fully situated in the civil/structures area, which is one in which PE seems to have a lot more leverage.

In automotive (and seemingly in many other branches), your truisms do not hold. I'm not trying to ride you, and I hope it doesn't come off that way. I'm just trying to delineate "the law" from "reality". (And I make this last statement with tongue firmly in cheek)

Finally, the person to whom I referred above does not practice in a single state (nor do others in his sub-sector). His particular field of expertise is automotive accident reconstruction and engineering evaluation. On most weeks, he spends some amount of time travelling to another state to either prepare or give testimony. He carries no PE in any state, yet is commonly called as an expert witness for major automobile civil cases. While few people know of him professionally, most engineers are probably familiar with many of the cases he's been involved in. I make that statement because this isn't some two-bit hack making a few bucks here--this is an area of 7-, 8- and 9-figure judgments, and many of the "expert witnesses" carry no engineering license. If he and his ilk were truly breaking the letter of the law, any lawyer on the opposite side would immediately nail them for a tactical advantage. This doesn't happen.

Heck, Clarence Ditlow--infamous expert witness affiliated with the Center for Auto Safety (he of NBC Exploding Trucks fame)--doesn't even have an engineering education, let alone a PE. Yet he routinely appears as an expert witness for plaintiffs.

Brad

 

[patdaly]

" But the point I was trying to make was that PE's are striving to make the PE a benchmark for all engineers. Now this may or may not impact members here or other engineers that are not members, but it will impact many."

Ok, my final statement on this subject. We already have laws keeping non-PE's from doing structural work, I see the logic in that. But I also am an arrogant, Missouri show me American, that spent 5 years and way too much $$ to earn my BSME. I also have roughly 25 years left in my career, and sanctioning body or not, the government or not, I will remain an Engineer until I decide to retire. Pass your law, just be ready to pay my way in the slammer.

Have fun boys!

 

[TheTick]

Somehow I doubt that the PE lobby can out-mu$cle the industry lobby, so don't sweat it.

There is more to this than just PE or non-PE. Many companies do have standards for who is allowed to be titled "engineer". Often, one must be a PE or have a degree from an accredited university for some positions.

Good and evil: wrap them up and disguise it as people.

 

[BobPE]

TheTIck:

You are right, I am a moderate PE in the PE world, there are lots and lots of hardliner PE's that are tackling industry and I do not really agree with what the PE's are saying or doing. As I stated before, I think a bridge has to be made to get exempt engineers on board, but my opinion is not sharred by many PE's.

bradh: I dont know the first thing about structural engineering LOL...other than to get a structural engineer to figure it our. Most of my clients are....industry...imagine that...

The problem with the courts is that a PE is the one who most of the time determines infractions to PE laws. There are often times no PE's involved with a lot of engnieering cases, so no check or balance is available in many cases. For someone illegally practicing engineering, like providing engineering testimony in court, a knowledgable person on PE law has to catch them. This is, as you pointed out, often not the case. I have had to point law out to judges, they didn't even know it...Most lawyers have no clue of the PE laws, the ones that do are very succesful. The PE's are making progress in this area, but its considered after the fact of public safety by many and not a high priority.

I know you are not trying to ride me, it truly is an area that has been made gray like you said. I just put it out there for discussion...

BobPE

 

[HB2U]

I will preface this by saying that I am not yet a PE, although I am pursuing that path having first started down the road as an environemtnal scientist, but realizing along the way that licensing was the only true way to be considered a professional. I also do not believe that unlicensed "engineers" know less than licensed engineers. That being said, consider these points.....

A doctor is an engineer of biological processes and trouble shoots, identifies and "designs" solutions for those problems. Yet, given two guys that went to the same school and got the same education, only the one with the license can practice medicine, and I'm sure that none of you here would go to the guy without the license for your medical needs, right?

Also, the guy without the medical license that perhaps works for a pharmaceutical company doing research, has no job portability because the body of his work is under the ownership of the company that he works for, so if they move overseas he has to go with them, OR he has to GET HIS LICENSE to practice medicine.

If all engineers needed to hold a license to practice, the field would be stronger and have more clout both inside and outside of industry. Why do you think all lawyers need to pass the bar exam?(our corporate attorneys must have their licenses even though they rarely go to court. We as engineers are the only profession that will fight amongst ourselves about the need for licensing to better the profession and increase our oppurtunities. Why is that?

We are also the only profession that people solicit based upon who has the best prices. Who in the world shops for the cheapest doctor or lawyer?

May I remind all of you that Doctors, lawyers and engineers all come from an apprenticeship based system of education, yet the engineers are the only ones that want to remain in the blue collar world.

If the license is just jumping through a hoop and just a piece of paper, then go get it - it can't be that hard. If you haven't learned that life is a game and that you've got to play the game to succeed, then you're going to have a long, hard life.

 

[buzzp]

I believe if a PE is going to be applied to a product design engineer, whether mechanical or electrical, they have a lot of work to do to write some tests. I do not know of any state offering a license in product design. Someone once told me that Colorado may have this. Does anyone know of any states offering license in product design?

 

[TheTick]

Interesting point, buzzp.

I have a friend who is an engineering profeesor and PE that moonlights teaching PE test prep courses. Most of his customers are companies that manufacture and design products.

One of his customers even has a mandate that all engineering positions be filled by a degreed engineer or certified PE. On one test, nearly all of his students failed. The reason was that the test was heavy on thermo and light on mechanics. This did not go well for those taking the test that had not been to college. If they had a test that focused more on their experience and core competencies, the students would have fared better.

Good and evil: wrap them up and disguise it as people.