not up to snuff.

[rowingengineer]

Background;
A gentleman graduated from a university with a BE (civil), then applied to a many local firms looking for work as an engineer, however came up stumps and got a job as a civil draftee with the idea of over time moving into engineering.
The gentleman after 6 years now has a drafting with some engineering job description (design daftsmen). He would like to start to apply for his certification as an engineer.

Issue; the gentleman has requested his supervising engineers (aka my former boss) sign off on reports of his career, they have refused saying they don’t think he has what it takes to be an engineer, also stating that he should have never got his BE as he got it in dubious circumstances (I don’t know the details). I have been approached because I did work at the company to sign off on his reports; I haven’t made up my mind on this yet.

Question; is his supervising engineer the man who should make this call, or should he just sign as appropriate the reports if true, and let the board handle the rest.


An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field

 

[rowingengineer]

Hokie,
You are probably right; I think my jaded opinion has developed due to my experiences on the assessment board in recent times, and DOT engineers applying for structural engineer cert. It all comes down to if you believe standard culverts are civil design or structural design or enginereing at all. But I hadn’t thought of submittals, I would expect them to be handled at the interview stage.

IRstuff,
The board should be the answer to that question, but I’m not that confident hence the discussion.

Thankyou everyone for your input, I have decided I am going to negotiate on behalf of the gent with the supervising engineer. I am going to suggest that the gent enter a development program for a minimum of two years.

An expert is a man who has made all the mistakes which can be made in a very narrow field

 

[hokie66]

Best wishes, RE. The direct approach is almost always the best one.

 

[Ron]

The Mentoring Maven (RE) strikes again!! That sounds like a reasonable approach, RE. Good luck.

 

[rbulsara]

IRSTUFF:

That decision lies with the board. The supervisor is not the board. There is no room for slander. Supervisor is free to not provide the recommendation. That is not mandatory.

Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[rbulsara]

In fact it is the policy of most companies in the USA, only to confirm employment and position of their former or current employees and not comment on their personality or competence.

Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[rbulsara]

Also

..it sounds like the application in Oz is similar to the PE for the definition of "responsible charge" of engineering works.

How can one without being PE (prior to getting the license) be in responsible charge of engineering works?

Someone is misinterpreting the requirements. The requirements to be able to take the PE exams include engagement in engineering work, be able to perform calculations, write specs, evaluate existing conditions, knowledge of codes etc.

Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[JStephen]

Here in the US, we are required to get letters of reference for the PE, in additon to the tests and all. However, the requirements for those letters vary somewhat. Some are worded such that they seem to be an assessment of technical skill, others more as personal references. Consequently, someone you have worked with, but haven't actually met, may serve just fine as a reference in one state, while someone who has known you for 20 years, but hasn't worked with you, may serve just fine as a reference in another state. With this kind of variation, it makes it hard to give a blanket recommendation of how it ought to be handled somewhere else, without being familiar with the wording of the requirements and how things are normally handled.

 

[IRstuff]

A board knows nothing about the engineer, save any examinations taken and any recommendations given.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[hokie66]

To the contrary, an interview board in Australia (and that is what this thread is about) can form its own opinion of a person's aptitude for engineering by asking appropriate questions. The board will include engineers in the specialty of the applicant.

 

[rbulsara]

Hokie66:
That is true for USA also.



Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[moltenmetal]

The idea of the referee/mentorship/experience record process in a licensure system is to prevent the licensure of people who got the degree but failed to gain the necessary skills, and of those who may have the necessary skills but lack the character to uphold the legal and ethical responsibilities of licensure. It's a cheap stand-in for a proper formal internship/mentorship/apprenticeship program (which we should probably have!).

Sounds like a load of pompous crap, I know, but some of us take these legal and ethical responsibilities quite seriously. Dunno what it was like at your school, but at mine it was quite hard to excel but dead easy to scrape by with a degree. Not everyone with that fancy piece of paper is someone who I'd entrust my own life or the lives of my family members to, and that can literally be the case with a professional engineer's judgment.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

I once had a co-worker ask me to vouch for him so he could get a hand gun permit. If there was one person who should never get a gun - he was the poster child. But he got others to vouch (maybe they didn't want to piss him of) and so of course he got it.

Not everyone is cut out to be an engineer... And god knows we can do more damage than a handgun!!

 

[IRstuff]

There are guys that are good enough to blow through an interview and fool the interviewers, but you still wouldn't want to hire him. We had such a guy get hired in our division, but he took credit for work that wasn't his. He wasn't incompetent, but you couldn't trust him any further than you could lift him with one pinky.

That's not something that'll be revealed in any interview process, but would be evident from an impartial assessment by his supervising manager.

TTFN

FAQ731-376

 

[HamishMcTavish]

RE, if the chartered system in Oz is the same or similar to the UK you don't have to get involved vetting the academic qualifications as the relevant institute should have done that.

It will be whether the experience years count or not which you may well be able to attest to. Have a look at the UK-SPEC

http://www.engc.org.uk/ecukdocuments/internet/document library/UK-SPEC.pdf

which gives the detail of what is expected and compare that to your knowledge of his activities. If the two don't match up then don't sign his stuff off.

The IMechE has a scoring system to assess candidates against each of the criteria:
Scoring guidance for those attaining CEng:


Level 1 = Performs the activity with significant supervision and guidance; performs basic routine and predictable tasks; little or no individual responsibility. (This level of competence would not normally be sufficient for election to Membership)


Level 2 = Performs the activity in a range of contexts; supervision only required in more complex circumstances; some individual responsibility or autonomy. (This indicates a minimum level of competence for election to Membership, which should be supplemented, by higher levels of competence in the areas most relevant to the field of engineering in which the applicant is employed).


Level 3 = Performs the activity in some complex and non-routine contexts; significant responsibility and autonomy; can oversee the work of others. (This indicates a normal level of competence for election to Membership).


Level 4 = Performs the activity in a wide range of complex and non-routine contexts; substantial personal autonomy; can develop others in the activity. (This indicates a high level of competence and suitability for election to Membership and possibly Fellowship)

Hopefully the Aussie institutions should have similar guidance to help you with your quandry!

Regards, HM

No more things should be presumed to exist than are absolutely necessary - William of Occam

 

[HgTX]

When I applied to take the PE exam in Texas, there were a couple of parts to the application. One was what they called the "experience record". For that, I had to list the various positions I'd held, and what engineering functions I'd performed within those positions. My supervisors had to sign off on that. As far as I'm concerned, their signature means that yes, I accomplished those tasks while under their employ. It doesn't mean I did them well, it just means I did them successfully enough to count as "doing".

A separate part of the application was letters of reference.

It sounds like the OP is talking about the first kind of thing (documentation of experience) and not the second (how good someone is at their job). Yes?

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[rbulsara]

HgTx;
That would be consistent with my view.

Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[BJC]

Texas was the last state to require Engineers to take test to get a license. It use to be you just needed three other PEs to be a reference for you. It had the only application I have ever seen that required a picture. The common rumor was they needed the picture to be sure you were white.

I could see parallels in the original post in this thread to things that were happening in the US. For instance:

"got his BE as he got it in dubious circumstances"= He got it at Tuskegee
"The gentleman after 6 years now has a drafting with some engineering job description (design daftsmen)." = At least they gave him a job doing something besides sweeping the floor.

"then applied to a many local firms looking for work as an engineer," - That mighty upity of him.

 

[HgTX]

Before they had the exam in TX, they needed not only the references but also the experience record. Which is why in TX you submit about 12 pages of experience documentation whereas in MI it's only about a page (says a friend licensed in MI).

They still ask for the photo, but now they want it along with the imprint of your newly acquired seal, not as part of the application.

I think attributing racism to the OP's boss is rather a stretch.

The question has to do with what one is attesting to when one signs off on the candidate's experience reports. And the answer is probably printed on that form somewhere.

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376