Practising Engineering in USA States 17

[stanier]

Has the requirement for bieng licensed in a state ever been challenged as being in restraint of free trade?

Does the free trade agreements with Canada, mexico, Australia allow for engineers considered professional in their homelands to work without registration in the state?

I am a consultant working out of Sydney Australia and undertake work all over the world except as yet in the USA. I am primarily engaged by consultants as a sub consultant. Is it possible for me to work on USA projects? It would be a nonsense if I did my work but some other engineer had to sign off on it because he had a license and I didnt. The only relelvance that engineer may have to my speciality is knowing my email address and phone number.

 

[imagitec]

There is no reason that someone in my line of work - engineering, at various times, imaging equipment, medical devicess, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and weapons systems - needs to be certified by some government bureaucracy.

Canada is in violation of NAFTA.

Rob Campbell, PE
Finite Monkeys -

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[RDK]

In what way is Canada violating NAFTA?

US products made under the terms of US laws are allowed into Canada without engineering certification.

Unless you came to Canada and practiced engineering here then Canadian law has no effect on you.

Canadian engineering laws are in no way a restraint on the trade in the goods or service that you manufacture or sell.

The provincial associations are NOT government bureaucracy. They are organizations established under provincial laws to regulate the practice of the profession. Professional engineering in Canada is a self regulating profession. We professional engineers elect the board that runs the association for the protection of the public.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[Ashereng]

I would like to add that to become an engineer in Canada, there are two primary routes that I am aware of.

Route 1:
1) Go to an accredited university in an accredited undergraduate program (and pass). Note undergraduate. A graduate degree (e.g. M. Eng) does not work.
2) Accrue the required working/experience requirement of the province you seek registratin in. This ncludes "credit" for equivalent experience.
3) Write and pass the law and ethics exam.

Route 2:
1) Write and pass the "technical" exams as mandated by the province you are seeking registration in.
2) Accrue the required working/experience requirement of the province you seek registratin in. This ncludes "credit" for equivalent experience.
3) Write and pass the law and ethics exam.

I left out the character reference, criminal record and all that stuff - I would imagine that it is similar to the US.


Any Canadians (for that matter, anyone else) out there, please correct me if I have erred.

 

[solid7]

I do believe that Rob makes a good point. I failed to completely understand the hangup over this whole issue - when in fact, it appears that the very people who started the thread aren't even speaking of a "professional" engineer in the proper context - at least not in terms of what it is in the US.

If that's the case, Canadians should have an easier time working in the US than Americans would have working in Canada.

RDK - do you *still* believe, that as an engineer, you do not have full and equal access to American markets? (in the context of engineering, not lumber, or whatever else) I've heard that charge leveled so many times, but I still have yet to see it adequately supported.

The analaogy regarding the driver's license now becomes moot. You're driving without a license (metaphorically speaking) in the US, unless you're signing off on safety or environmental issues. (which require a "PE" license)




**************
Check out CATBlog!

 

[imagitec]

RDK,

I would like to provide engineering design services in my area of an expertise to a Canadian company. I could probably do all of it from my desk in New Hampshire, though I might like to take a few trips up there to work side-by-side with the Canadian engineers. For the sake of this argument, I do not have my PE license.

Is this allowed?

Rob Campbell, PE
Finite Monkeys -

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[MrMojito]

Let's be a little more direct on this "Free Trade" issue. Stanier, have you contacted any USA state boards and asked them for permission to practice engineering in the USA under the "free trade" agreements? Have you been denied? Has anyone else that we know of pursued this? Or are we all speaking hypothetically?

 

[Ashereng]

This is vastly more resrtictive for the degreed US toaster oven engineer who wants to work in Canada than it is for the Canadian bridge engineer who wants to work in the US.

solid7, quoting Rob, yes, the Canadian licensing/P.Eng, is more restrictive than your US counterpart.. I believe this is the case.

 

[RDK]

The issue is on licensing. The intent of the free trade agreement is that each jurisdiction would have its own licensing requirements in place and that every person wanting to work in that jurisdiction would have to meet the local licensing requirements.

The basis for meeting the licensing requirements would be either one of two methods. For national of the location, they would have to obtain the license in the same manner that existed without the free trade agreement.

For nationals of the other country, their home license would be recognized as the basis for admittance to the profession in the other country.

Thus anyone with a PE/P.Eng could easily get a P.Eng/PE as the case may be.

If you never bothered to get a PE then that was your choice and you would not be eligible for a P.Eng on the basis of prior licensing. If you did get a PE then you should be eligible for a P.Eng.

Of course the reverse should be true that a P.Eng should be able to get a PE solely on the basis of the P.Eng status.





Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[imagitec]

The issue is not licensing, it is the free trade of professional services. You encourage the US to "scrap the exam requirement", presumably for both US and Canadian engineers. I encourage Canada to scrap licensure requirements for work that comes under the industrial exemption in the US, even when that work is performed in Canada or for a Canadian firm.

Rob Campbell, PE
Finite Monkeys -

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[RDK]

Asereng

You are correct that there are (or at least were) those two routes. However the second route is almost never used. I have only met one person who obtained his P.Eng this route. He had completed three years of university and had to either take one more year or write 7 exams. He chose the exams.

After the end of it he said that the one year university would have been much easier and have taken less time. He was either working 75% of the time or studying for about 2 ½ years.


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[Ashereng]

I know of a B.Sc with a M.Eng who took the exam. Because the undergrad degree is science, not engineering, he had/decided to take the exam.

Another colleague, foreign trained, also took the exams.

I was told that it wasn't that hard, just time consuming.

Anyhoot...

 

[RDK]

rjcjr9

I’m not sure why US refusal to live up to their agreements is grounds for Canada to make changes to our system.

Even if we did adopt the industrial exemption, it would not change the fact that I cannot compete in the US because I work in a field that generally requires licensure in the US. The intent of NAFTA is clearly that P.Eng and the Mexican equal be recognized as sufficient qualifications for a PE in the US.

I can never understand why a nation like the US which takes great pride in being an honourable nation where a man’s word is his bond can collectively decide to simply scrap a troublesome clause in an agreement like NAFTA or the Geneva Convention for short term interests.

Do you not see that this harms the prestige of the US in the international community?


Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[RDK]

Asherng

The exam route for Canadian engineers is fundamentally different than the US exam system.

Its not a 8 hour open book multiple guess exam on limited topics but was an intensive long answer on one topic at a time in depth. Think of simply getting the course outline and then having to write, with no study guidance or other preparation material being provided, an in-depth exam on the topics of the course.

The full slate was if I remember correctly 21 exams in total. Exemptions could be granted for prior university education. It covered all engineering areas so a civil candidate would have had to take the water, transportation, municipal and other exams along with structural.

Like I said I only know the one guy who did it and that was when I was a summer student in 1975. (He got his last marks back when I was working for him.) I do not know if this route is still available but if available it is almost never used.

We had a guy in my engineering class who was 51 years old in first year. He had worked as an engineering technician and wanted to become a P.Eng. He had looked at the exam system and decided that 4 years university, when he was older than most of our parents, was an easier route to follow.

Sometimes exams are required of foreign graduates who cannot prove that their courses are equal to Canadian ones but that is usually limited to one or two exams. These people have bachelor degrees prior to writing the exam.

Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[imagitec]

RDK wrote, "That is why I said that the spirit of the agreement is that the licenses issued in Canada shall be recognized in the US."

Stanier wrote, "But I do believe that the representations made, if not literally, but in spirit in the free trade agreements are misleading and deceptive."

RDK wrote, "The spirit of the free trade agreement was that Canadian licenses would be recognized as equal to US licenses."

RDK wrote, "That is why I said that the spirit of the agreement is that the licenses issued in Canada shall be recognized in the US."

RDK wrote, "The intent of NAFTA is clearly that P.Eng and the Mexican equal be recognized as sufficient qualifications for a PE in the US."

Nothing in NAFTA obliges any party to honor the certifications of another or to standardize on the same criteria for certification:

http://www.worldtradelaw.net/nafta/chap-12.pdf

If we're going to talk about intent or spirit, we may just as well talk about the spirit of free trade in general, or the spirit of free market economics, the concept from which the others derive. In that case, see my immediately previous post.

Rob

Rob Campbell, PE
Finite Monkeys -

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[stanier]

MR Mojito

I have not applied to any Boards. The thread started as a hypothetical question. The responses have filled these pages with many suppositions. The thread has meandered through many topics. All have been passionate and interesting and perhaps should be over a beer or two. There is unlikely to be any concensus when the passion of nationalism is involved. I did hope that the unity of being fellow engineering professionals would rise above that anachronism.

The question of how engineers in the USA find the constraints of individual licensing remains largely unanswered save for that is the way it is done and we are all proud to serve our country. My resolve to not bother working there is solid. There are far easier places to earn a quid.

I will take my case up with the learned societies here and with our government. I am sure it wont make a jot of difference for we are burdened by a federal and state bureaucracy as well.

Take care and have a happy new year. Perhap some could read the works of The Delai Lama, Ghandi or Martin lther King and see a different way forward.

 

[imagitec]

Stanier wrote:

The responses have filled these pages with many suppositions. The thread has meandered through many topics.

Take care and have a happy new year. Perhap some could read the works of The Delai Lama, Ghandi or Martin lther King and see a different way forward.

You're joking, right? I took the time to look up AUSFTA and NAFTA, which you at least cited but clearly had not taken the time to read, then based my arguments on it, and I need to seek enlightenment?

Rob Campbell, PE
Finite Monkeys -

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[imagitec]

To be clear, I support mutual recognition of Canadian and Mexican engineering licenses, and I would love automatic recognition of one state's license by another. But this thread didn't ask that question.

I do not support the elimination of the industrial exemption in the US.

Rob Campbell, PE
Finite Monkeys -

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[solid7]

There is unlikely to be any concensus when the passion of nationalism is involved. I did hope that the unity of being fellow engineering professionals would rise above that anachronism.

Passion of nationalism? That's odd - because I thought that everything was presented pretty straightforward. Engineers don't make law in the United States. So what gives?

The basic fact - no opinion or nationalism set forth - is that US law (in the US, of course) comes BEFORE any trade agreements. The United States, as well as any other signatories, have an obligation to uphold their own laws, and protect their own citizenry, ahead of any external treaties.

I do not speak toward any specific aspect of NAFTA, or any other treaty. I am not a lawyer, RDK I assume is not a lawyer, nor is anyone else who has posted, unless they have failed to identify themselves as such. Therefore, we can poke fingers at each other all day long about who is upholding the treaty, and who is not. But my point is simple, concise, and clear - citizens of a country come FIRST. If politicians don't understand that, I can't be held responsible. Constitutions are bigger than treaties.

The question of how engineers in the USA find the constraints of individual licensing remains largely unanswered save for that is the way it is done and we are all proud to serve our country. My resolve to not bother working there is solid. There are far easier places to earn a quid

Most engineers in the US work for large companies - hence, they never even notice. It's not an issue. They go straight out of the university, and straight into a job. End of story. Many of them even go on to start their own business. Again, no licensing, (except for occupational, which everyone must have) unless they have to sign off on safety or environmental related issues.

The only thing that makes it hard to earn a living in the US, is finding your way in a highly competitive workplace. (getting your first customers)

Perhap some could read the works of The Delai Lama, Ghandi or Martin lther King and see a different way forward.

Sounds like a complete waste of time. There are definitely better authors than those 3 combined.

For what it's worth, I actually enjoy reading RDK more than these.




**************
Check out CATBlog!

 

[imagitec]

Solid7 wrote, "Most engineers in the US work for large companies - hence, they never even notice."

Actually, it's not the size. Most of us work in "industry", so licensing isn't an issue.

Rob Campbell, PE
Finite Monkeys -

http://www.livejournal.com/users/robcampbell

 

[solid7]

Actually, it's not the size. Most of us work in "industry", so licensing isn't an issue.

OK, point taken. I probably wasn't thinking of "large" in the same terms as the IRS. My firm is only 2 employees, so anything much bigger than that is "large" to me.




**************
Check out CATBlog!