Industry exempts: how can they find PEs for recommendations? 2

[leanne]

Consider the case of many industry exempts:

No RPEs in an engineer's current realm of influence.

How can an engineer in an industry exempt job make connections with RPEs who would be willing to become familiar with the engineer's work to vouch for them on an RPE application? Without the engineer being required to leave current job.

How about a little brainstorming?

 

[BobPE]

TheTick:

You bet those state boards know what is going on!!!! That is why I speak so openly as I do. I dont like what the state boards are doing or the people invloved with the boards. They treat it like a club for the few...That is not what it is about and until you exempt engineers start asking questions of them, they will no doubt stay that way...I question the boards all the time as to why we cant reach out to the exempt engineers, but there are few PE's like me willing to buck the system, most of them are sheep, following the herd. Start asking what the board can do for you, not what you can do for the board...

LEanne: you dont need a EE PE to be a reference, you have to have had fluids and structures, there may be PE's there that will help.

BobPE

 

[TheTick]

As far as boards go, remember there's one for every state in the U.S., so it's difficult to speak generically. However, I am all too familiar with the types of critters attracted to such posts.

My other two reference have never worked with me. One is an old friend I've known since grade school. He has every confidence in my ability. The other is an acquaintance who has taken the time to familiarize himself with my work in order to be comfortable vouching for me.

Ironically, the only PE who turned me down as a reference is someone whom I was not comfortable with, because I have no confidence in his abilities.

Still mulling over whether to take the test or go via the experience + degree path offered by my state (Wisconsin). My vanity wants me to pass the test. Plus, it would be nice to get a refresher on some things.

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

 

[electricpete]

Bob - do you recommend that people be eligible for licensing without zero references from any PE? (if so - how do we address the issue of verifying the character of the person giving the reference?

 

[BobPE]

electricpete:

I think that PE references are a very good ting to have as they allow a higer level of review of the applicant like an apprentice/master review. I do think the current reference process is broken though. I Think we need to fix it and I really think it has to start with the boards. An industry exempt should be able to apply with 0 PE references and I think the board should take responsibility on a case by case basis to review this individual. The boards do not seem to want to be involved in anything that entails more work though. I think volunteers with PE's as part of their responsibility to be licensed should make time available to review 0 reference people as an outreach probram sanctioned by the boards. They would go to your place of work and review you, look at your projects, talk to others that were references for you and make a binding determination. Right now, its the luck of the draw program like TheTick said. If I choose not to vouch for someone, I am sure there are others that will, kinda making the reference process useless to a degree in its current form.

I am convinced that the only way the process will change is by active and organized interaction of exempt engineers and the boards...With out this, the boards seek the path of least resistance and are unwilling to take on new initiatives.

Just my thoughts...

BobPE

 

[BML]

PSE and bradh:

I'm in Michigan too, on the west side of the state. When I called the state board office, they told me that Michigan does not require PE references. They changed the law to allow references from people who could be eligible to sit for the exam. This was done specifically for engineers who work in the automotive industry so that they would have an easier way to achieve licensure.

Lucky us

 

[electricpete]

Let me play some more devil's advocate on the subject of allowing licensure with no PE reference. Hopefully I'm not making any enemies... just kind of thinking out loud.

It requires more effort by the board to evaluate not just the applicant but also the applicant's references. Sorry I personally don't believe the volunteer method will fly. More effort = more cost. Even with extra effort I believe the diminished screening capability equates to lower screening standards.

We bend over backwards and "lower" the screening standards to what end? For people that don't even need a PE. Those who need a PE work in an industry where there should be no problem finding references. Those who don't know any PE's don't work in such an industry and don't need a PE.... except maybe since it looks good on business cards and resumes. Maybe that in itself is enough and everyone should have equal opportunity but I don't know.

On the other hand, maybe those exempt industry folks want to transition to non-exempt PE-required construction industry and should be given equal opportunity. But should it be allowed if one has never worked or been exposed to such industry?.... i.e. one day you have never seen a drawing/design with a PE seal, and the next day you are authorized to seal drawings? Seems a little strange, but maybe it's ok.

 

[brad]

electricpete--
Interesting points, but I'd like to counter one:

You state "one day you have never seen a drawing/design with a PE seal, and the next day you are authorized to seal drawings". In spite of my multiple PE references, that applies to me. I was in exempt industry, and I still am. I'm recalling that I had 4 PE's actually vouch for me, and only one of them routinely used his stamp (two had NEVER signed off on anything, and the fourth hadn't in several years).

I have my PE and COULD sign off if I wanted on things, but I have never once used it. I also gained nothing from having PE's as references, vs. not having them (other than fulfilling the requirements). Granted, the PE's I worked with were very competent engineers so somebody could argue that their competence rubbed off on me. However, there were plenty of good non-PE's who were more influential in developing my engineering abilities. I think this is a good thing that Michigan has done (this must have happened only in the last 4 years).

Brad

 

[electricpete]

Good comments Brad. When I think it over I think my last two paragraphs of my last message were out of line. It would be great if engineers in exempt industries were allowed equal opportunity to get PE and I don't think there is any reason to be concerned because someone has worked only in an exempt industry.

Still the bottom line barrier to implementing it remains that PE board has no easy means of verifying non-PE references. Accepting their comments without verification amounts to lowering the bar. I know there are a lot of honest hardworking competent deserving folks with equally honest and competent references, but imagine the following scenario: a bunch of degreed engineers in a non-engineering job. Perhaps it has elements of sales, admin, project management etc, but not engineering. They falsify their SER's to make their job description include engineering design. They get experience-verification references from each other, along with character references from the guy down the street and the church pastor. How does PE board know the experience has been fudged? No-one giving an experience reference has anything to lose (non-PE cannot be punished by the board). Once again I know there are a lot of honest people, but how do we cope with the dishonest people that would fudge their experience? (not a rhetorical question... please respond)

If PE verifies the experience, he is putting his own license on the line.

 

[leanne]

We bend over backwards and "lower" the screening standards to what end? For people that don't even need a PE.

Legally in most states, engineering graduates doing engineering work (even exempt industry engineers unless the references are limited to internal use) cannot call themselves engineers or even have the title with the word "engineer" on a business card unless they are a PE.

Currently I can only say that I have an education in electrical engineering from an ABET-accredited institution. I'd like to legally be able to say that I am an engineer & do that, I'd have to be a PE.

 

[electricpete]

Good point. I agree. As I mentioned above I think those last two paragraphs of my 8/4 message went overboard. Got caught up in devil's advocate mode. As you all have demonstrated, there is a legitimate need for exempt industry engineers to be able to get their PE.

There is also a legimate question of how reference from non-PE's should be verified. (Not because non-PE's deserve any less respect, but only because they have nothing at stake in the recommendation and the door is open for abuse by the few bad apples)

 

[miner00]

Leanne - What do you call yourself then? In my state, I can have "engineer" on my card as long as I don't use the almighty PE abbreviation after my name. Do you consider yourself a tech?

Resident (non-licensed) doctors are still allowed to call themselves Doctor. Just no MD after their name.

miner

 

[BobPE]

miner00:

without going into what state you are in, if you don't have your PE and you presented your card to someone outside of your company, you could receive a stiff fine depending on which state the infraction occured. Your state may be dfferent, but many states restrict the term engineer and presenting yourself as an engineer in those states by the use of a business card will get you a fine.

You are not alone, there are hundreds of repeoted incidents listed in the various state agencies every month about this. Most engineers are unaware, but get the hefty fine anyway which I do not really agree with. Their companies gave them that title, but the fines go against the individual, not the company.


BobPE

 

[electricpete]

It sure doesn't make any sense to me that someone should be restricted from using the title engineer as long as they are within exempt industry and do not offer services outside their organization.

 

[leanne]

mier00 - I don't currently have business cards.

My last business cards had my title as Quality Manager.

 

[BobPE]

me either electricpete......but using a card is paramount to holding yourself out as an engineer in many states and they make a lot of money from prosecuting people for it....

Why do you think microsoft systems certified engineer is no longer used? it was a shame that the poor schmucks that used "engineer" after that 6 week program were getting nailed for 2,500 to 5,000 dollars a pop for holding themselves out as engineers after Microsoft took all their money....

BobPE

 

[miner00]

From my State Website on licensure:

"Engineer" means a person who, by reason of intensive preparation in the use of mathematics, chemistry, physics, and engineering sciences, including the principles and methods of engineering analysis and design, is qualified to perform engineering work as defined in this part 1.

"Professional engineer" means an engineer duly registered and licensed pursuant to this part 1.

(1) It is unlawful for any individual to hold himself or herself out to the public as a professional engineer unless such individual has complied with the provisions contained in this part 1.

Nothing in this subsection (3) shall prohibit the general use of the words "engineer", "engineered", and "engineering" so long as such words are not being used in an offer to the public to perform the services set forth in section 12-25-102 (10).

By this definition (and the rest of my state laws) I am fully justified in calling myself a Mechanical Engineer on a business card, memo or by shouting it into the streets...as long as I don't either claim to be a "Professional Engineer" or try to open my own consulting firm where I will be peddling my expertise to the general public.

This distinction between Professional Engineer and Engineer works very well and anyone who needs to know if you are PE can easily tell by the letters after your name. This makes a lot more sense to me than trying to mince words. Most people have a hard time understanding what I do as a mechanical engineer, I can't imagine the confusion if I started claiming to be a Mechanical Assembly Technologist or some other such thing.

I would be curious to hear whether Colorado is an anomaly or the current norm.

miner

 

[BobPE]

miner: its an anomaly. If you were to hand out your card or write a letter to say a firm in New Jersey, you would be fined....To me, that sucks, and Colorado, in addition to a few other states, has to fix the problem being that they are in the minority. Now if your card had your Colorado address on it and said engineer, you may stand a chance, but again, its up to you to prove, and again, I think that sucks....why should you have to defend yourself to another state board?

PE's are working to fix the laws, but some states just dont have the time or money to deal with it, and its hurts us engineers...on one way or another...

BobPE

 

[leanne]

It varies slightly from state to state...

http://www.tbpe.state.tx.us/downloads/laws.htm

In Texas:

Section 1.2. PROHIBITED ACTS AND CONDUCT.

(a) From and after the effective date of this Act, unless duly licensed in accordance with the provisions of this Act, no person in this state shall:

(1) Practice, continue to practice, offer or attempt to practice engineering or any branch or part thereof.

(2) Directly or indirectly, employ, use, cause to be used or make use of any of the following terms or any combinations, variations or abbreviations thereof as a professional, business or commercial identification, title, name, representation, claim, asset or means of advantage or benefit: "engineer," "professional engineer," "licensed engineer," "registered engineer," "registered professional engineer," "licensed professional engineer," "engineered."

et al

It's pretty clear that public use of the title engineer in Texas without registration is a violation of this state law.

Section 20. EXEMPTIONS.

(a) The following persons shall be exempt from the licensure provisions of this Act, provided that such persons are not directly or indirectly represented or held out to the public to be legally qualified to engage in the practice of engineering:

(5) any regular full time employee of a private corporation or other private business entity who is engaged solely and exclusively in performing services for such corporation and/or its affiliates; provided, such employee’s services are on, or in connection with, property owned or leased by such private corporation and/or its affiliates or other private business entity, or in which such private corporation and/or its affiliates or other business entity has an interest, estate or possessory right, or whose services affect exclusively the property, products, or interest of such private corporation and/or its affiliates or other private business entity; and, provided further, that such employee does not have the final authority for the approval of, and the ultimate responsibility for, engineering designs, plans or specifications pertaining to such property or products which are to be incorporated into fixed works, systems, or facilities on the property of others or which are to be made available to the general public. This exemption includes the use of job titles and personnel classifications by such persons not in connection with any offer of engineering services to the public, providing that no name, title, or words are used which tend to convey the impression that an unlicensed person is offering engineering services to the public;

et al

I have worked since graduation under the industrial exemption above.

 

[BobPE]

leanne: I fight the industry exemption simply because of what it does to us as engineers....it is very devisive. I think it also opens up corporate abuse of engineeing as a profession. I am not against the industry exempt engineer in any way. I just can't help but think that if industry were required by law to use your services only if you had a PE, that you would be better off as an engineer, (not a better engineer as seems to often be the confusion)....

just my thoughts....

 

[miner00]

Leanne,

That is interesting...I just found on the sate of texas website a section stating:
What title can I use if I'm a graduate engineer?
Graduates of all public universities recognized by the American Association of Colleges and Universities have the right to disclose any college degrees received and use the title "Graduate Engineer" on stationery, business cards, and personal communications of any character. Refer to the Texas Engineering Practice Act, Section 1.1.

California restricts the following:
f. Represents himself or herself as, or uses the title of, registered or licensed Civil, Electrical, or Mechanical Engineer or any other title whereby such person could be considered as practicing or offering to practice civil, electrical, or mechanical engineering, unless he or she is correspondingly qualified by licensure as a Civil, Electrical, or Mechanical Engineer under the Professional Engineers Act.

In New York:
1. In New York State, who can practice professional engineering?
Section 7202 of the New York State Education Law states that, "Only a person licensed or otherwise authorized under this article shall practice engineering or use the title 'professional engineer'.

It seems like most of these states are restricting use of the title "professional, Certified, or licensed". Not necessarily "engineer". They are all very vague about this subject.

miner