Raise Your Hand - "Industry Exempt Engineers" 7

[PM]

Now remember this is an ethics forum, . . .and no one will come knocking on your door regardless of how you answer.

How many of you, who consider yourselves "industry exempt engineers", have dispensed what you consider enginnering advice to this, or any other forum of people outside your own company?

For the moment, please let's dispense with the semantics of whether advice is "scientific" vs "metaphysics" vs "applied science" vs "engineering" in nature and scope. Another way to put the question is: "How many of you, who have offered engineering advice, are actually licensed to do so by your local state, province or territory?"

Some of you may already be a step or two ahead of the argument and might claim "freedom of speech" is a supreme doctrine which serves to quash state legislated prohibitions against practicing professional engineering without a license. I'm sure there will be plenty of argument why an individual's rights in this matter supercede the common good as expressed by the legislature, but let's have a show of hands how many of you believe that much of the engineering advice offered herein involves illeagl practice?

Regards,

PS: I'm already waiting for the quick wit who will point out that PE's, P.Eng's and CE's licensed in their own jurisdictions might be construed as practicing outside their area by participating within the broad reach of this electronic forum. :

 

[BobPE]

binary:

get over it and contribute, or you are right, you may not fit in....but please don't speak for everyone....

BobPE

 

[Binary]

Bob, I never speak for anyone but myself and I stand behind what I say, even when I'm being a bit pissy in response to being insulted.

I've no doubt that our hosts will delete my little jab in no time at all.

Based on the "professional" requirement, you could certainly use my post against me to boot me. It was definitely unprofessional.

 

[BobPE]

binary:

just contribute...no one is looking to boot anyone...exept maybe the lawyers that visit the site from time to time....

Your actions are picked up by others in here and it may make them choose not to contribute also...and that would be a bad thing...

You have good things to say, just say them...don't get frustrated...as most engineers seem to do......

For every time someone bashed me, you would think I would have thrown my computer away and hid...LOL

BobPE

 

[sc]

Binary,

I don't consider any of the eng-tips forums to be for "professional" engineers only, if it was we would not have such excellent computer related tips, work related tips, geotechnical tips, law related tips, etc.

I always assume that this site is for the engineering team as a whole. I certainly have never taken RDK or Dannym to mean that they want "professional" engineers only at this site and would expect that if they ever displayed that level of bigotry, then I suspect that they would be booted out of the forum. They certainly do express strong opinions on what consitutes a "Professional" engineer, as is their right.

I just realised that I have never looked at the site rules, tsk naughty me, where are they?


regards
sc

 

[RDK]

I think that I am being misquoted again.

I used one definition of a professional that included the professional body being self-regulating, have a right to title and a right to practice. Engineering as practiced in the US does not fall under this strict definition.

I’m sorry if some people take this as a personal insult. Its simply one definition of what a profession is and it was impartially applied to the US practice of engineering.

This was raised in the Lack of Respect thread and I was suggesting that the lack of professional status as defined above is one of the problems facing US engineering.


I never said or implied that the board should be limited to those who do fall under this definition. If you check some of my other posts you will find that I actually support non-engineering types who post an intelligent question and make an effort to understand the response. (You will also find that I am quick to red flag those that are obviously students or non-engineers looking someone to solve their problems.)



Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng

Construction Project Management
From conception to completion

http://www.kitsonengineering.com

 

[IRstuff]

I think that the issue is that some feel that licensing and PE status will improve their public standing and respect. It won't. Lawyers and contractors are licensed. Neither get much in the way of respect.

The issue is that the public no longer cares about this or us at all. The lowest NBA scorer garners more respect and salary, without a license to play, because that's what people think is important now.

When was the last time you heard anyone telling their children to do well in school so that they can become engineers? Engineers and scientists are nerdy looosers in the eyes of the public and have been since the end of the Apollo program. The public wants their children to be doctors and lawyers, not for respect, but to make money.



TTFN

 

[leanne]

How many of you, who consider yourselves "industry exempt engineers", have dispensed what you consider enginnering advice to this, or any other forum of people outside your own company?


enginnering ?

You don't really expect me to admit I might have in the past ever been culpable of said issue, do you?

I am a law school drop out & I work in an industry that relies on industry exemption.

 

[brad]

Note regarding the "engineering professional" requirement--the site has intentionally used that term, as opposed to "Professional Engineer", to describe who is allowed on the site.

The intent of this site is not limited to PE's; it is intended for people who are practicing engineering. (Professional is also appreciated).

Cheers,
Brad

 

[PM]

I'm interested to know where the forum rules, policies, etc. that have been cited here are found. Perhaps, I'm such a theno-peasant that I can't grasp the obvious, but I can't find the references mentioned above.

Where does it say engineer professionals only, or no students, lawyers, etc.?

Regards,

 

[electricpete]

There are some here:
faq731-376

Also some here

http://www.tecumsehgroup.com/administration.htm

 

[electricpete]

That FAQ addresses students and engineering professionals.

Also on the upper left corner of your screen is
"Eng-Tips - Technical Work Forums for Engineering Professionals"

No you are not a theno-thingy. It is hard to find.

 

[JamesBarlow]

I think everyone needs to take a step back here and think about what we are doing.

This site is what most would call an anonymous posting service, meaning that anyone can log on and create a username. There are only a hand full of us who use our real names, but most people come up with some cute name so no one knows who they really are.

This site is also on the Intenet, which means that it can be viewed from anywere in the world. Unless you have some kind of global license, which I don't think any of us have, there will be somewere that you are not licensed to practice engineering.

I can appreciate the discusion from an academic standpoint, but I don't think there is any practical need for this. No one on this site will every be prosecuted for performing engineering services without a license since that's not what anyone is doing. The most important thing to remeber is that the law doesn't say you can't talk about engineering, or teach engineering, it states you can't perform engineering services.

 

[electricpete]

James - I by and large agree with your opinion. But if you are suggesting the discussion is inappropriate I disagree. Can you provide anything other than your opinion to substantiate your claims.

"Unless you have some kind of global license, which I don't think any of us have, there will be somewere that you are not licensed to practice engineering."
That in itself only proves that there may be violations in some parts of the world, not that what is done here is right.

"No one on this site will every be prosecuted for performing engineering services without a license since that's not what anyone is doing."
Based upon analysis of laws under which jurisdiction?

 

[EGT01]

I tend to agree with those that believe what we do here is not the practice of engineering in a legal sense but rather a sharing of knowledge.

While searching the internet for info about a problem I was trying to understand and solve, I found a link to a discussion in one of the forums offered here. I first entered as a visitor but found the posts by the other members to be of benefit and decided to become a member.

In one respect, I don't think what we do here is different than an individual submitting an article for publication in one of the trade journals. That's the way it used to be done. It is an open discussion with the opportunity for peer review and critique. I've never published any material but I don't think you have to be a licensed engineer to publish. Maybe the only difference is we don't have an editor checking before publishing.

I've seen the link to FAQ731-376 and thought it was reasonable but I've not understood whether that was actually official policy here. It appears to me that it is just another member's perception of "How to Post Questions Without Getting Red Flagged". No disrespect to the member who submitted the post as a FAQ but can't anyone do that?

Also, I must confess that I'm just now seeing the web page for "Administration". I can't say that I'm a Vendor or a Regulator (though I'm not quite sure what is meant by Regulator) and that all of the discussions in which I have participated have been in regards to services or products offered by such. Does that mean I have not been using these forums as intended?

 

[brad]

EGTO1,
The "official policy" is that stated in the Site Policies (upper-right-hand corner of your screen). You are correct in noting that FAQ's can be written by anybody; although the FAQ is not "official" policy, it was written by a member who helps management set site policies.

What makes a "flaggable offense" is sometimes like pornography--it's hard to describe but you know it when you see it. This particular FAQ was trying to convey some of the issues which have over the years been expressed as unacceptable behavior by various members.

Brad

 

[johnfalky]

As a non-degreed engineer, and therefore a technician, and perhaps even a fool, I agree strongly with the need for certification and registration. As for myself, I NEVER engage in activities of presenting myself as an Engineer and NEVER engage in engineering practices without traceable checks and balances. Instead, I work for (or send my work to) qualified parties who review my work and then sign off on it. It is simpy too dangerous and frankly illegal, as stated in other documents in this string to go out and practice Engineering in the public field without certification. For those who have the P.E. rating, I take my hat off. However, also a word of caution. The hubris and professional arrogance that can come with certification can also lead to serious blindness to outsite input. A professional who feels no need for review of performance and who sets his own "professional" standards can be just as dangerous as those who illegally present themselves as being qualified "When this is not the case." I even apply these standards to qualified parties that supply me with data packages, subjecting the content of their documents to ANOTHER professional party for critical review. In this manner I managed to uncover a party who was fraudulently misrepresenting himself, and had been getting away with this act for some time.

 

[Sparweb]

(Sorry for joining the thread so late)
Thank you, PM, for posing the question that has been hovering in my mind for several months. I recently made my application for certification as an Engineering Technologist from my provincial organization, and have been mulling over their ethical guidelines, particularly in regards to my prolific posting on Eng-Tips, ever since. It's not a PE organization, because I don't have a degree to qualify for that.

I have given advice very freely in the past, and in considerable detail in some instances; for example, I have explained to somebody how to proof-load his wing. In light of the code of ethics I'll soon adhere to, I wonder if that was a good idea at the time. BobPE argues that giving detailed advice is not what Eng-Tips is for. The code of ethics requires me to offer advice that's based solely on adequate technical knowledge. In this case, I offered my advice without any knowledge of what the wing looked like, how it was made or attached to the fuselage.

Item 11 of FAQ731-366 bails us all out of the liability for any advice we give, no matter how detailed it is. Further, nobody paid me for the advice, and I have never tried to pass myself off as a Professional Engineer giving approval to anybody's project. I see no avenue for any legal liability, and the absence of any company name at the bottom of my postings is deliberate: the opinions I express are my own, with no implied "authority". (I see other members put their whole names and companies in their signature lines, and wonder if they have to deal with "flak" as a result).

So it boils down to "is it right"? Again, I can go back to the code of ethics. Principle 10 is to "promote public knowledge and appreciation of applied science and engineering...". That sounds most like what we're all trying to do. I'll avoid getting carried away with it from now on.

STF

 

[MikeMech]

It's a shame we live in a society that is so pervaded by fear of liability. I design and sometimes build mechanical parts and machines for industry. Giving advice on a machine, for free or for pay, I have to ask myself:

1. Am I qualified to give this advice?
2. Has my client completely explained and do I completely understand the problem at hand?
3. Is it worth the risks?

The ethical answers to these questions are often different than the legal answers.

Licensing is an attempt to provide an objective opinion about #1. However, my license is in mechanical design, which covers a vast area of knowledge. Am I qualified in some of them? Yes. All of them? No. Do I know everything there is to know about even one of those areas? No. So I'm put in the position of deciding on the level of my own expertise in a particular area on a regular basis. Is this approriate? If not, then who should decide?

Question #2 can never be answered 100% affirmative in the legal sense, even if you document everything in writing until you have to rent storage space for the paperwork alone. Ethically, again you are forced to decide for yourself.

Question #3: the legal implications often outweigh the safety implications for me. Most of my designs are no more of a personal safety issue than a ladder or a bumper winch. Can you hurt yourself with it? Yes, but generally you have to give it a good try to suceed. Looking at the history of ladder manufacturer litigation gives a clear idea on how the legal system sides with this one.

Aside from engineering issues involving code work (structures, pressure vessels, etc.), shouldn't there be some limited amount of "buyer beware" aspect to engineering advice? Otherwise, one could never give ANY engineering advice without a ream of paperwork accompanying it, and a bill to match. I think in the non-code world of engineering this sort of advice is given on a regular basis, often by non-PE's and even non-engineers. Whether it's legal or not, ethical or not, it happens a lot. Companies make a choice: "buyer beware" advice for little or no cost, or professional engineering advice for $$$$. Economics lead most companies to the first choice.

I don't know the answers, but I think it's a shame that usually it's the lawyers who decide these grey areas, not my own ethics or an ethics or engineering board. Where does my liability end? When the lawyers stop smelling money in my pocket. That seems to be the practical application of our current system. It's sad that ethical and legal liability seem to have drifted apart from each other.

Devil's Advocate Questions: I give Bob free advice on how to check his tires for wear. They later blow out and, while not hurting anyone, total his uninsured car. Am I ethically/legally liable? How about if I advise my friend Tom to leave his wife (I being married and therefore knowledgeable about the institution), and then she takes him for everything in the divorce? Am I ethically/legally liable?