Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations GregLocock on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Limiting Engineering Enrollment 4

Status
Not open for further replies.

Maui

Materials
Mar 5, 2003
1,917
The report summarized below contradicts the rumors that are frequently circulated in the media regarding anticipated shortages in qualified engineering candidates for industrial positions in the United States. Such rumors lead me to wonder why this topic has received so much attention when I personally have seen little evidence of it during the course of my career. When it comes to mechanical, electrical, and civil engineers I have seen no evidence of a shortage in the talent pool over the course of the last 15 years. If anything, I have seen a surplus of engineering candidates. Disciplines such as metallurgical engineering are the exception rather than the rule - qualified candidates in such specialized areas are usually difficult to find. North of the border in Canada there are degreed engineers driving cabs today because they can't find engineering positions. So who stands to profit from such rumors? The colleges who educate engineers need to fill the seats in classrooms, so they would benefit by enrolling more students. But I think that the companies who hire us would stand to benefit a great deal more since the availability of a larger talent pool would tend to keep wages down. In other professions such as medicine it's interesting how the AMA appears to have a hand in limiting the enrollment of MD candidates each year to keep the number of medical doctors from outpacing demand. Perhaps engineers would benefit from such a practice as well. If we could do it, do you believe that we would all benefit from limiting the number of engineering candidates that are allowed into a given program of study each year? I'd like to know what your thoughts are on this subject, both positive and negative.


Study Questions U.S. Shortfall in Math, Science
EE Times (11/06/07) ; Riley, Sheila

The common belief that U.S. students are falling behind in science, technology, and engineering, eventually leading to a worker shortage crisis, is mistaken, concludes an Urban Institute report, which says that not only are U.S. students doing well in science and technology subjects, but that the U.S. is educating a sufficient number of scientists and engineers to maintain its current global competitiveness. Urban Institute senior research associate Hal Salzman, who co-authored the report, says international tests ranking students, which frequently show that U.S. students are weak in math and science, are flawed. The study found that over the past 10 years U.S. students took more math, science, and foreign language courses than in previous decades. In 1990, only 45 percent of high school students took chemistry, but by 2004 the percentage of students taking chemistry rose to 60 percent. The percentage of students who took three years of math rose from 49 percent in 1990 to 72 percent in 2004, and the percentage of students taking four years of math rose from 29 percent to 50 percent. Salzman says the education systems in Japan, Singapore, and South Korea do lead to better test scores, but that does not necessarily lead to better jobs, a better economy, or more innovation. Salzman highlights the fact that Singapore is promoting a national "creativity initiative" because the Asian city-state's leaders realize the need to de-emphasize its narrow educational approach. Center for International Industry Competitiveness at the University of New Haven director George Haley says that testing a broad selection of countries puts the United States at a disadvantage because in the U.S. poor-performing students reduce the U.S. average, but in other countries those students would not be eligible to take the tests.

Maui

 
I know all sorts of firms in my area that have been recently having a difficult time finding engineers (structural).

In fact, if you look back at the historical attitudes of engineering firms back in the 1960's and 1970's there was a huge number of candidates looking for work, with few jobs. (I know, I was looking in 1982 even and had a hard time getting hired with an MS degree even).

Some senior management persons I know just don't quite understand today why they need to pursue and treat their employees well. Some firms I know have gotten quite hurt by large numbers of employees quitting and moving on due to an expectation that the employees should be "damn glad they have a job". Instead, these employees have two or more offers to choose from.

 
I see no evidence either and metallurgist are few and far between. Maybe they mean they can't find qualified candidates at the prices they want to pay.

Who stands to profit???? Don't know, but the media has always spun a bunch of crap (from time to time) as far back as I can remember, sometimes I have to turn off the news just to be a regular person.

The limiting thing is probably due to the amount of candidates. I don't know the extent of control that is being used but doctors are directly related to public health and maybe that is the justification. If a field is to have a limit, start with lawyers.


==========================================
Business Page ------------------------------------------
Motorradtraum....
 
All facts and statistics are two different things; the news is good at creating a nice gray area between the two. Then taking conclusions from statistics and generalizing it for the whole country and displaying the conclusions as facts.

In this area there seems to be a surplus of engineers.
 
My opinion with no factual basis: There is no shortage of structural engineers rather there is a shortage of structural engineers willing to work for mediocre salaries. I personally know of thirty available structural PEs willing to relocate for 105/hr (and a modest benefit package). If your billing rates can not support this salary level then the fault is in the billing rate, not the salary level. Raise the rates to winnow out the low dollar clients and raise salaries to attract the mercenary technical experts.
 
There are stories of engineers in Canada that are under-employed, however there is also a demand for engineers in Canada.

The problem is that being an engineer consists of more than technical skills. An ability to communicate is essential, and there is a perception is that engineers that immigrate to Canada cannot effectively communicate with clients or staff. This creates a reluctance in hiring managers to take on staff with foreign credentials.

 
civilperson,

agree 100%. In my experience, when things have been so busy that some people cant find an engineer to do their work some guys are still undercutting others for work when they should be raising fees. The same guys complain that new engineers are asking too much.

csd
 
I too am concerned about the supply of engineers when considering our society’s view of the problem ? The following link “The Knack” should shed some light on this very serious issue.
 
Don't know if it's different in the States but I know in the UK a lot, and I mean a lot, of the people I was in aerospace/aeronautics with at university didn't go on to be employed in Engineering. A lot went into IT/programming or similar and I think quite a few into management consulting type places. I know some mechanical guys who did similar.

I remember one recruitment fair type event that was basically a management/consultant firm looking to hire grads. They actually preferred engineers and would take engineer grads (especially from aero) with lower grades than from many other courses, including management/business degrees!

My course also had around 10% drop out rate.

I wonder if this and all the other factors is taken into account when people crunch these numbers and come up with ideas for limiting enrollment.

Don’t get me wrong, if it means I get more money I’d have to be interested in the idea but I’m not sure it would work. For the example of Doctors, the large majority of people that take Medicine at uni go on to be Doctors as far as I know. Where as for Engineering I’m not sure this is the case.

As to who benefits from ‘too many’ engineering enrollments. Well as suggested it’s the schools and the potential employers.

Although, can you really have too much of a good thing;-)

Now limiting lawyers, there’s an idea although it may accentuate the trend in the UK & US that you get the defense you pay for! Limiting how many members of parliament/government can be lawyers though, now that’s an idea I’d vote for!


KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
 
I don't believe that journalists understand anything that they write about, first off. After a quick perusal of a study of some sort or other, most journalists are out writing about how the sky is falling due to one cause or another, without understanding the science or phenomenon behind the report. So with that said, I also don't believe anything about engineering shortages. I also believe that it is more a matter of employers not finding cheap help.

The only ones to blame for this situation is engineers, in my opinion. We need to police our ranks, we need to keep any warm body from being called an engineer without proper credentials, we need to recognize that engineers are tradesmen more than professionals and we need to unionize.
 
Unionize? I worked for a while in a union job in a drugstore.

If the engineering union was anything like that one, I'll pass thanks.

If it's like my wifes though (social work through the school system) I'd consider it.

$1 a month is worth it for what she gets (no cost medical, retirement, job security (3 acts of god to get fired once through probation), time & half compensation for extra time, as much vacation as a european and more paid holidays... Just a shame her gross is about 1/2 mine;-))

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
 
They had the author of that study on NPR last Friday with Craig Barrett of Intel providing counterpoint. Barrett kept saying things like "Why would the government be issuing so many H1B visas if there were people willing and able to do the work here?" He also made a point of saying American students and workers are average and that average isn't good enough.

American students can be better than average, but unless they're willing to work longer than average hours for less than average wages, business men like Barrett will never be happy with the labor pool. They'll keep complaining about engineering shortages while engineers keep taking sales and management jobs.

Meanwhile, many foreign PROFESSIONALS are willing to trade long hours and poor wages for the visa and ticket to America. Salaries continue to rise slower than inflation and pretty soon we will be considered a trade instead of professionals, complete with exorbitant school loans and lower middle class quality of life.

And don't get me started on unions.
 
Youngturk, the comment made by Craig Barrett is similar to comments that many CEOs have made regarding available engineering talent, yet I personally haven't seen evidence of these shortages. I believe that it boils down to what they are willing to pay you to do the job. In your example Mr Barrett would stand to gain a significant economic advantage by hiring engineers with H1B visas due to the lower wages that they would be willing to accept. These same individuals would find it difficult to job hop because of the restrictions that are placed on them by their immigration status. A talented, low wage employee who is essentially captive for a period of several years is attractive to certain employers, and I can think of several companies that hire such individuals for exactly these reasons. Unfortunately it also drags down the average wage for the engineers who are already here, not to mention the increased competition. I wonder if the goverment is willing to grant a larger number of H1B visas because of the news stories that are being written about the supposed shortage of engineering talent. Perhaps lobbyists also play a role in this. It has the hallmarks of manipulation, and I would not be surprised to find that it is being propagated by the individuals who stand to benefit the most - the comapnies that we work for.

Maui

 
I couldn't agree more. If you didn't pick it up from my previous post, let me be more clear: I wanted to reach through the phone and strangle the man.

I was unable to get work as an engineer for six months after graduating with a 3.5 gpa from a good university. Many other people in my graduating class moved on, either to other careers or graduate school, and not necessarily engineering grad school. Many of these people wanted to be engineers, but found it just wasn't happening. I currently work with a group of three people in the company with my specific discipline. A recent one-week posting for a position in the group netted more than ten qualified applications. Shortage shmortage.
 
We should also not forget that Manufacturing has left this country by and large, reducing the need for Engineers. Bring Manufacturing back, and you would need more Engineers.
I saw somewhere that in a few years, China will be graduating more Engineers each year than the US will produce children. Wonder where the Manufacturing has gone?


As for a Union? No thanks, I will bargain for myself.
 
Pat, take a look at the later posts in this thread for information about the number of engineers graduating from China and India versus the United States: thread730-141668

Maui

 
To further Kenat's point, maybe half the people who went through the same civil program I did are now employed as engineers. A few went into software design and a large number went into project management.

There are a few firms known locally for hiring recent immigrants for lower wages than anyone else will work for, but I doubt they save money in the long run. People know the reputation and charge more to work on projects those firms are involved in. The lack of experience and knowledge of local codes and local expertise often causes problems.
 
The offereing of a H1-b visa to a foreign grad student may be roughly equivalent to offering a US citizen a $100K signup bonus. There are many higly qualified foreign engineers that equate getting a H1B with greatly increaisng their earning capacity and ability to provide support to their parents that remain overseas.

An even greater benefit to the US employer is that the worker is nearly indentured ; it is difficult for that worker to move to other US companies prior to obtaining a "green card" permanent resident status. So, during his 7-10 yr technical peak period after graduating, the H1B worker must remain at the same employer. By having the INS drag their feet on providing green card permanent status, they effectively extend the terms of indenture.


But , once the geren card is issued, it "sayonara" , baby.
 
The only benefit that I see from a H1B visa is that your pulling from a larger talent pool, the rest of the world. The reason the talent pool in the states is so small is that engineers get paid in most places as well as HVAC technicians and in a lot of cases worse than electricians. The talent will appear if the wages are there.

There are maybe a few area's that need foreign talent to break new ground. For the other 98% of engineering, very little new ground is broken.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor