Professional Governance Act (BC, Canada) 4

[ekalfwonS]

Long time browser but first time poster, so bear with me.

Are there any Engineers here from British Columbia, Canada, who work in high tech? Can I ask how you, and your company, are responding to the new Professional Governance Act?

I am a P.Eng and have worked in high-tech for most of my career. I started off as a Production Engineer, and have moved through a number of production- and design-related roles to where I am now, officially the Lead Mechanical Engineer, and only P.Eng., at a contract design firm.

About 2/3 of the employees here hold Engineering degrees, across many disciplines (Electrical, Firmware, Software, Mechanical, Chemical, etc.). The company has been providing product development services for startups and assistance for more established companies who need temporary staff to deal with work surges or special projects. The company has also developed some products of their own that were sold into specific niche markets.

Until February, the Engineers and Geoscientists Act had a vague definition of Professional Engineering. It was long, convoluted, grammatically obtuse, and was used by most high tech engineers to justify not obtaining P.Eng. status following graduation. That, coupled with zero enforcement of any kind from APEGBC, has resulted in hundreds of small (and large) companies employing a lot of engineers in design roles that do not, have never, and never intend to, hold a P.Eng. Some of us did get our P.Eng.'s, but apart from paying $500/year and getting a magazine that talks about construction projects once a month, we don't see a lot of value in our registrations.

With the introduction of the Professional Governance Act, the definition has been changed. It now explicitly, and broadly, spells out what an Engineering Discipline is (listing electrical, mechanical, mechatronics, etc). And then it goes on to say that Professional Engineering is the "provision of advice or services that are based on an Engineering Discipline." (edit: Note that this wording didn't make it into the PGA, but into an Order in Council that was issued on February 23rd of this year... Presumably legally binding nonetheless).

So it now appears that the PGA has closed the loophole on whether or not Engineering graduates need a P.Eng. to work as Engineers in BC. If you're doing Engineering, you need a P.Eng. If your firm is doing Engineering, it has to be Registered.

It seems like EGBC has managed to birth a bit of a cash cow here with all the new registrations this could result in. Hopefully the money will go towards more services for the new recruits. And coupled with the Mandatory Professional Development provisions in the act, it's going to be trivial for EGBC to pick out what firms aren't registered and go after them. What will that mean for the P.Eng.'s working for these firms?

Is anyone else struggling with this?

 

[drawoh]

ekalfwonS,

Can you, or somebody's lawyer, define "working as an engineer"?

--
JHG

 

[ekalfwonS]

@drawoh, i'm not sure how that would help.

Professional Engineer is defined clearly in the Order in Council that was issued. "Providing advice or services that are based on an engineering discipline."

Engineering Discipline is defined clearly in the same order: "means agricultural, biomedical, bioresource, biosystems,building, chemical, civil, computer, electrical, environmental, food, forest,geological, geomatics, industrial, marine, mechanical, mechatronics, metallur-gical, mining, naval architecture, nuclear, petroleum, software and structuralengineering and engineering physics"

I find it hard to argue that any design work I do as a Mechanical Engineer isn't a "service based on the discipline of mechanical engineering."

 

[dik]

In the last half a century, I've witnessed the profession going down the... and it will likely get worse.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

 

[Sparweb]

Hi ekalfwonS, and welcome to Eng-Tips.
FYI, I'm in Alberta, not BC, and just for fun, I'm registered in Saskatchewan, not Alberta. This is not an issue because (a) I'm not the engineer of record on my employer's permit to practice and (b) aviation is federally regulated so in some ways the provincial rules are just another piece of paper. The teeth that can bite my posterior are in Ottawa. So in some ways I don't keep an eye on developments in BC. What you're asking about isn't too different from similar issues in other provinces, though.

This is an issue that has been or still is traveling through each province at different rates and in different ways. There is a large diversity of rules among the provincial engineering bodies in Canada IME. If the changes you're seeing look big, be reassured that the pendulum can swing a lot farther each way. For example, the professional body in Quebec has been suspended by the province, while the body in Alberta is so strict that they are seriously considering making a Master's degree mandatory for registration.

If I read your post correctly, I assume that there is some way in which your ME education applies to your work, but not so far that you stamp anything with a P.Eng. seal. Do any of your company's engineers stamp anything? Are any of them registered?

Is there some reason that your company refers to its work as "engineering"? Would it be good enough to call it "design" or "fabrication" or "production"?
Words matter to many people, and there is a legal protection being given to the professional body by the PG act, which is meant to enshrine the meaning of "engineering" as an activity that protects the public safety. Is public safety threatened if you and your colleagues don't do your jobs well?

There are plenty of firms that design stuff, draw CAD, crunch numbers in FEA and CFD, handle materials, heat solder, assemble equipment, and do similar things that are intimately associated with engineering but AREN'T legally engineering. So they do not call themselves engineers. It's splitting hairs but as rules like this come into play, you are forced to choose a side. You will have legal responsibility for your work if you claim to have it but don't need to, or if you actually do legally responsible work but don't claim to.

If you answered "no" to some of my questions, then looking carefully at your operations, and particularly how you refer to it in public, could help you avoid a mess. Especially if it's just one surrounding a name.

https://professionalgovernancebc.ca/about/professional-governance-act/

Please remember: we're not all rednecks!

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[ekalfwonS]

If I read your post correctly, I assume that there is some way in which your ME education applies to your work, but not so far that you stamp anything with a P.Eng. seal. Do any of your company's engineers stamp anything? Are any of them registered?

We're a consulting business that provides engineering design and product development support for entrepreneurs, start-ups, and small and large companies that have temporary (or sometimes not-so-temporary) needs for support. None of the work we've done has required a stamp or seal. And as far as I know none of the work we've done has then gone to another company that would take that work and have a P.Eng. stamp or seal it. We're talking products in high-tech, from consumer goods to medical devices mostly. Lots of firmware work as well. When we design stuff, our "safety certification" generally comes from organizations like CSA, FCC, UL, etc., and the products are taken there by the companies we contract to, not us directly, so liability is even one step removed.

I am the only registered P.Eng., none of the other engineers are even members of the association.

Is there some reason that your company refers to its work as "engineering"? Would it be good enough to call it "design" or "fabrication" or "production"?

How do you define "engineering?" The simple answer is that we're engineering solutions to problems.

Still, none of this really matters. I know what i'm doing is engineering. And I have a P.Eng. The question is, how f*cked am I because the company I work for isn't registered, and isn't likely to become registered unless the Association comes after them. And if I'm registered and (as mandated by the annual reporting requirements) I list the company I work for on my membership, how long will it be before the Association starts harassing the company, and I'm the reason for it?

 

[Sparweb]

How bad can it get?
Pretty bad.
This is an extreme example, and one of overreach, but the point is you don't want to give an overweening official the excuse they need to hassle you for the sake of just scoring points:
Mats Järlström

AFAIK, it's a dice-roll whether you'll be made an example of, if you're *mostly* in compliance but not perfectly so. I once worked for an engineer that not only didn't bother to maintain a permit to practice, but also let his registration lapse. He wasn't raked over the coals, but he was taking a risk, all for the sake of less than a thousand dollars per year.

For you, it might take only an additional fee, and a few hours of boring seminar to pull your company the rest of the way into compliance, if they wanted to. In some sense, I can see how you could actually be a magnet for attention if you're registered but the company doesn't have a permit, while "claiming to" do engineering. Could there be some bored administrator in APEGBC scrolling through the member roster collecting a list of companies to extort? Maybe, but that's an extreme view, and they probably have more integrity than that. If you get ahead of the issue with your company you could let your boss/executive know about the change in regulation and present them with some options. Once it's their decision you are less likely to be the culprit if APEGSBC comes banging on your door.

This may not be helpful to you, but FYI, since my registration is a required part of my job, I put on my employment contract that the company would pick up my annual dues.

Please remember: we're not all rednecks!

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[ekalfwonS]

For you, it might take only an additional fee, and a few hours of boring seminar to pull your company the rest of the way into compliance, if they wanted to.

Sadly, not that easy. Compliance requires all engineers on staff be registered, which would mean getting everyone else at the company on the path to their P.Eng (great, i'd get to supervise 12 EIT's for a few years). Also, Registered Firms need a lot of internal processes developed and documented for ensuring continuing compliance and adherence to the mandatory professional development guidelines. It's a *lot* of work for a small company to take on. Most large Professional Engineering firms already have processes in place that would meet the requirements, and are likely already paying for memberships... The additional work for them would be minimal in comparison.

In some sense, I can see how you could actually be a magnet for attention if you're registered but the company doesn't have a permit, while "claiming to" do engineering.

The catch is that engineering isn't a regulated profession. Professional Engineering is. Otherwise, they would have to go after railroad engineers, aviation maintenance engineers, etc. as well. I'd argue that public safety is of greater importance in those roles than in mine.

Could there be some bored administrator in APEGBC scrolling through the member roster collecting a list of companies to extort? Maybe, but that's an extreme view, and they probably have more integrity than that.

Nobody has to scroll through looking for non-registered companies anymore. Everything is in a computer now, so all they have to do is automate the comparison of the list of Registered Firms against the list of Firms that members are employed by. Anything that's not on the Registered list gets flagged. No searching, just an automated database dump that regularly shows a list of scofflaws. How long before reducing that list becomes a performance metric for someone working at the Association? It is exactly an integrity issue... If the intent of the new legislation is to reign in everyone working in engineering who isn't registered as a Professional Engineer, then it's what they must do.

If you get ahead of the issue with your company you could let your boss/executive know about the change in regulation and present them with some options. Once it's their decision you are less likely to be the culprit if APEGSBC comes banging on your door.

I've documented my communications with my employer, which at this point is about all I can do. My concerns have been noted, it's not my job to make the company comply. I've got enough on my plate just preparing and submitting a Continuing Professional Development plan. :\

 

[Sparweb]

It may be best to get specific at this point.
Which act of parliament or the provincial legislature does YOUR engineering work affect? Here's the list you can choose from:

https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/107_2019

For comparison, because I'm an aero engineer, my work affects the Aeronautics Act of Canada (a federal law, worth noting).

If your answer is "none of the above" then you don't need to be an engineer. It's fine that you ARE an engineer, but you don't have to professionally SAY you're an engineer to do the work you do. Define the problem so that it goes away. Adjust your company's marketing material accordingly, and sanitize the information your have filled out in your APEGBC profile page. Problem solved?

This sounds like a facile way to look at it, but it worked for 20 years for that previous employer I mentioned. You can be quite sure that anyone in APEGGA who wanted to, could have used a computer well enough to spit out the report as you suggested. Well that employer didn't claim to be an engineer on any printed or public material. It was easy enough to let our clients refer to us as engineers, and of course in practice we were, and we were already being regulated by the federal government's aviation regulations (vastly more strict, you would not believe).

I have also spoken to a lawyer about this. If you're still concerned you may want to do the same. Corporate lawyers are likely to be aware of how to keep your business in alignment with these laws. Note that engineering is just one of many regulated professions. Lawyers themselves are legally bound by the code of their profession, so they "get it".

Please remember: we're not all rednecks!

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[ekalfwonS]

If your answer is "none of the above" then you don't need to be an engineer.

That's probably the crux of it. None of the work i've done in the last 20 years would affect any of those subordinate Acts. Everything i've been party to designing has been something that would be vetted by another regulatory body before it could make it to market... CSA, FCC, UL, etc. But the Association has been happy to register me as a P.Eng. working with an area of practise defined as "High Technology - Product Development", a category not covered by the PGA or any of the subordinate Acts. So really the Association has been happily taking my money (>$10K to date) when it was never necessary that I pay them anything.

I've directed the company to remove reference to my P.Eng. from the website, and advised them to remove references to "engineering" as well. The only place we would see it mentioned now is in our Bios, where we list the degrees we hold. I hold a degree in Mechanical Engineering, a fact that is irrefutable and mentioning it is not regulateable by the Association. Beyond that, we'll just wait and see what happens.

Ironically, my degree specialized in Aeronautical, and i'm a pilot... I know exactly how strict the CARs are.

 

[Sparweb]

That's going to help. I still wish you good luck. There are many others in the same boat, getting used to stricter definitions and what the implications are.

We can see the nonsense of it, all circling around a narrowly-defined word. Given the legal power of regulation and enforcement, we now have to be careful how we use the word "engineer" in public. That's partly the goal of all of the professional associations, and for comparison's sake, consider the mess if we cavalierly used the terms "nurse" or "doctor". Oh, except that, actually, the public DOES use these terms cavalierly, and in fact they do get themselves in trouble as a result. People willingly pay money to charlatans to pull their teeth out, give them drugs, and accept advice that drastically affects their health.

When gnashing one's teeth about overbearing regulations, it helps to keep the public's unfailing record of self-harm in mind.

Please remember: we're not all rednecks!

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[geotechguy1]

Sparweb - APEGA making a master's degree mandatory has been rumored for ages, I can't see them doing it except for geotech and structural, and even then they'll need a high-profile failure to justify it since the view of the people at APEGA's office is not shared with the majority of the membership body.

 

[Sparweb]

the view of the people at APEGA's office is not shared with the majority of the membership body

Then why do those motions get passed??
Even the premier of the province has called out APEGA on their practices, but they don't change.
They are currently blocking a colleague of mine from registration, not with a reason, not with a denial, but rather by losing her documents and then charging her to process the replacement!
Rant over, sorry.


Please remember: we're not all rednecks!

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[geotechguy1]

Oh I agree that they're useless, I applied to have my membership temporarily set to non-practicing P.Eng on the understanding that every 12 months it would reset to practicing since I'm out of the country...now they say that I have to re-apply to register, even though the information on their website and forms still states that you can temporarily set it to non-practicing every 12 months while you work out of the country so that you don't have to do duplicate CPD The only reason I did it is to not duplicate filling out the forms with CPD requirements in NZ and in Canada. Sigh.

The whole process is a joke anyway, considering APEGA grants licenses to Government of Alberta + Alberta municipal engineers who have never actually done any engineering and are just project managers that hire consultants.

 

[Sparweb]

Equally disappointed.
Anyway, it's best to call it quits at this point. This thread wasn't meant to be a bash on these organizations (my fault for going that far).



Please remember: we're not all rednecks!

http://www.sparweb.ca

 

[SAITAETGrad]

ekalfwonS remember CSA & other bodies do not take responsibility for your work. They simply indicate it has been accepted by their standard.

geotechguy1 some get a P. Eng. w/ APEGA w/o a degree. But masters was a thing being pushed in the US by NCEES & naturally Engineers Canada would have likely followed with something similar. However, turned out everyone not named Samuel Florman didn't like the idea - so it appears NCEES backed down. Note in Europe, 3 year bachelors w/ 2 year masters is the norm. Interesting if you have 3 year bachelors from Europe, APEGA apparently will require you to write 19 technical examinations.

ekalfwonS I doubt you will have a problem w/ your organization being unregistered. Many are not. I've seen them press organizations before - but in that case they just wanted compliance (i.e. $$$).

You take the good & bad w/ self-regulation in Canada. These organizations are not without value and generally the engineer organizations & members are far more accountable than those run by medical doctors (!).

 

[geotechguy1]

necroing this thread but 3 year bachelors apparently exist in NZ as well - and you can also do a PHD in 3 years - meaning you could conceivably have a 'washington accord' bachelors and a PHD in only 6 years. In North America the same process in geotech would likely take 10-15 years. In 6 years if you were very competent you could get a bachelors and an msc.

They still pooh pooh my overseas degree here as being unreliable (But insist we use the Morgenstern Method for slope stability calcs and P.K. Robertsons CPT correlations and software - both Professor Emereti of my university lol)