"Project Engineer" Title 10

[knelli]

Hi,

I am a licensed professional engineer (structural) that works for a Design Build firm. Our company managers have a habit of calling new project managers "Project Engineers". I have a problem with this, because the people they are titling as "Project Engineers" are new out of school with, at most, a 4 yr construction management degree (not engineering based). They then move up to being a "Project Manager" after gaining some experience.

My first job before I was licensed was at an A/E firm and we were not allowed to be called Engineers until we recieved our license. Is anyone aware of legal issues with calling a project manager and Engineer without an engineering background?

We do a lot of work with the government, and I could see a big issue with a new PM giving advice on a project, and others taking their advice because they assume they have engineering credentials (such as recommendations on shoring, removing forms, and other means and methods issues that would usually be asked to an engineer).

I was told that "Project Engineer" is an industry accepted term for a green or new "Project Manager" What are your thoughts?

 

[IceNine]

Well, "engineer" in section 1001.002, is defined as "a person licensed to engage in the practice of engineering in this state". And since section 1001.406 specifically allows an unlicensed person to use this term, I would say it's pretty clear. The term 'project' appears to be meaningless as far as the state of Texas is concerned.

 

[Ron]

IceNine..you just pointed out an apparent inconsistency in the statute; however, it is likely that the intent in 1001.406 was to not allow the broad use of the term "Engineer" by non-licensed persons. "Project Engineer" in many states is a protected term, implying licensure.

As IRstuff noted, an oral interpretation by a staff member carries no credence or weight. A written interpretation by vote of the board or by board counsel is the appropriate method to resolve ambiguity and misinterpretaion of the code.

 

[TenPenny]

1001.301. License Required
(f) Notwithstanding the other provisions of this chapter, a regular employee of a business entity who is engaged in engineering activities but is exempt from the licensing requirements of this chapter under Sections 1001.057 or 1001.058 is not prohibited from using the term “engineer” on a business card, cover letter, or other form of correspondence that is made available to the public if the person does not:
(1) offer to the public to perform engineering services; or
(2) use the title in any context outside the scope of the exemption in a manner that represents an ability or willingness to perform engineering services or make an engineering judgment requiring a licensed professional engineer.
(g) Subsection (f) does not authorize a person to use a term listed in Subsections (b)(2)-(6) or a variation or abbreviation of one of those terms
=========

In other words, if you work for a licensed firm, but are not licensed yourself, you can use the term 'engineer' in your title, as long as you don't perform engineering work, or use the term Registered/Professional/Licensed Engineer.

That's fairly clear, isn't it?

 

[Ron]

TenPenny...while it's clear on its face, if you put a title on your business card and give the business card out for contact in the public sector, you could be violating this part of the statute unless you are licensed. Giving your business card out is an implicit offer of services.

Why would you work for an engineering firm, hold the title of engineer, and not do engineering work (unless you are strictly in management....and then why would you use the title "Engineer" other than you usurp its importance in the engineering world to give yourself credibility).

 

[ash060]

I have never understood the whole name calling issue. If someone wants to call themselves an engineer let them. It doesn't bother me at all.

Every single licensed engineer I have every met puts P.E. behind their name on their business card, email signature, etc. that is how I know that they are licensed.

If that suffix is not there I assume that they are not licensed, and so far that has always been the case.

But I guess I am in the minority and the issue will rage on for years to come.

 

[frv]

ash060-

That is exactly what I was getting at. Perhaps our colleagues in other disciplines are getting their panties all up in a bunch because it not that common for them to be licensed. In our discipline, it is almost a given that you will at some point become licensed. Consequently, we can easily identify who is and who is not licensed. The term "Project" is absolutely meaningless in this discussion. Again, I think people are missing the forest for the trees on this one.

 

[hokiecivil08]

I graduated from college may 08 with a civil degree and immediately took the title "project engineer" even though i am technically an E.I.T. engineer in training.

Unfortunately this year i've gone within the same company to field surveyor to being asked to pose as receptionist and answer phones for a week while she's on vacation before beginning my undefined furlough (sp?) time. Sanitation engineer may be in my future haha.

 

[FeX32]

LOL...I guess going back to school may or may not fix that problem. My head would explode if somebody asked me to answer a phone.


Fe

 

[rowingengineer]

I am a Johnny come lately and I have only read the last few posts not the 60 odd before,

ash060
How do you feel about Lawyer (Juris Doctor) calling themselves a doctor ***** (specialling in law), and using this to gain clients when dealing with medical law suits.

Clearly the issue isn’t the use of the name; names mean nothing it is the implied meaning behind the name. We spend lots of time trying to educated friends/strangers as to what we do as engineers and what we are. We have codes of ethics that are part of the education process and are reaffirmed when seeking a licence. Confirmation of this is engineers being ranked high in most surveys as being trustworthy.

To have someone claim part of this good work, possibly eroding this good will by using the name is to me is fraud. I don’t know what the rule are for each state regarding what and if you can use the word engineer, but in my opinion unless you have gained the right to share or erode this good will by gaining the required experience/ UNI degree ect, then you shouldn’t get to share in any of the good will that comes from/with the name.


Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in mud. After a while you realize that they like it

 

[CompositeKid]

I think this all comes down to misrepresentation. It is conceivable that a project manager may only have a degree in business management and no knowledge of engineering science. If, on the project, a member of the team introduced himself as a "Project Engineer" when he had no engineering qualifications or experience he would be guilty of misrepresentation or simply impersonating an engineer. Similarly if I introduced myself as a law enforcement officer to a member of the public when my actual employment was as a retail store security guard I could be found guilty of impersonating a police officer as the member of the puplic would assume I was a police officer.

Everyone would like a job-title that makes them sound more important than they are. A great example I heard whilst working as a chef during university was Kitchen Hygeine Engineer or a pot-wash to you and me..

I think any company that actively uses the term 'engineer' to describe a person with no engineering experience is deliberately misleading people and as stated before, it could lead to avoidable accidents occuring..