Status 5

[SomptingGuy]

Engineers often moan about "lack of status". Can anyone define it? I find it hard enough to even explain to family and friends what it is that I do, so I don't see how I can hope for any kind of "recognition".

 

[TStaples]

Actually, Wikipedia summs it up quite well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_status

I think what most technical people bemoan is the fact that society (at least in America) does not "rank" (which infers status) the engineering profession as highly as others (i.e. Doctors, Lawyers, etc. . ..)

In some other cultures, it is quite different. I previously worked for a French electronics conglomerate, and I learned that Engineers, especially from the top French schools, are very highly regarded in France. I read somewhere that Engineers have been placed on a high pedestal in France going back to the days of Louis XIV. Louis XIV derived much of his power from his armies advanced weapons (for the times), which were developed by his engineers. Hence, he valued them highly, and it seems to have carried forward in that culture.

IMHO, it's much easier if you pursue engineering for the love of what you do, and don't worry about what others think!

-Tony Staples

http://www.tscombustion.com

 

[swivel63]

dang, from my point of view.....everyone seems to be incredibly impressed with engineers actually. not only from the professionalism we exhibit, but also the level of diffuculty of the course-work.

let's not pretend that engineering is by far the most difficult undergraduate curriculum that a university can offer.

 

[IRstuff]

Lack of status of engineers is mostly an American phenomenon. American culture in particular has been highly anti-intellectual. The typical American thinks of engineers as the guys in white lab coats with pocket protectors, horned-rimmed glasses, and zero social graces; "Nerds", "Eggheads", etc.,

Oddly, that's a fallout of the Puritan roots of the country. "Yankee ingenuity" has been the warcry of those who believe that only hard work and diligence is required for success and that book learning is practically an evil.

Doctors and lawyers, while they spend more time in school than engineers, are not required to be proficient at math, while engineers are required to do math above and beyond what most of us really need in every day work.

TTFN

 

[KENAT]

It's not just the US, UK too.

However in the UK they don't seem to have such a proverbial up the hoo-hah about it.

Not that that's right or wrong I just notice the difference.

 

[Heckler]

IRstuff,

Well stated. I've worked for a couple of nitch companies where the owners used "Yankee Ingenuity" to make their company sucessful. Nothing wrong with that but they had inferiority complex issues with degreed engineers.

Best Regards,

Heckler
Sr. Mechanical Engineer
SWx 2007 SP 2.0 & Pro/E 2001
Dell Precision 370
P4 3.6 GHz, 1GB RAM
XP Pro SP2.0
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1400
o
_`\(,_
(_)/ (_)

(In reference to David Beckham) "He can't kick with his left foot, he can't tackle, he can't head the ball and he doesn't score many goals. Apart from that, he'

 

[KENAT]

Maybe part of the problem is that in other industries/professions the ‘ranks’ are perhaps better defined.

In medicine, you have the various 'ranks' of Doctor (consultant, registrar, Senior House Officer, House officer… I can’t remember all the US equivalents, can’t have watched enough ER), as well as different ranks of Nurses, and the growing range of Physicians Assistants, Nurse practitioners etc.

In the legal system you have similar, in the UK you have Barristers then Solicitors (some of whom are now allowed to conduct ‘minor’ cases in court), in the US Attorneys & Paralegals etc.

I’m inclined to think most of these are fairly well defined and well understood even outside of the relevant industries.

In Engineering, it doesn’t seem so clear cut. Of course, there’s Engineers, which even the members of this site can’t agree to the definition of, then there’s a range of Technicians, Designers, Draftsmen/Drafters, Checkers, Tracers etc. And if you get into small scale Civil you then get to add Builders, Contractors, Tradesmen etc into the mix. And probably others for other specializations that I’ve missed.

And there’s all the separate (at least sometimes) but associated fields such as Architect, Surveyor etc. Given that different Engineering Industries or Specialties don’t have a standardized ‘rank’ structure is it any wonder the public at large confuses Engineers with Train Drivers, Appliance Repairmen and Mechanics.

The oft quoted solution, especially from those in Civil & Structural that deal most often directly (or near directly) with the public, is to tighten up the rules on who can be called an engineer to strictly only those with PE/CEng. While I believe this could and probably should form part of the solution I truly don’t believe it alone is sufficient and with the current rules on getting PE/CEng would exclude too many who in my opinion do have the right to be called Engineers (for whatever it’s worth).

Just my 2 penneth

 

[jck26]

The reason why engineers do not get respect is that they do not fight for it. No matter how much work you do as a legal asst or nurse you can't be promoted to the next level. Period. I have had to endure many senseless discussions with semi & wanna-be engineers that if I was a doctor I would say "Are you a doctor? No, well then I can't discuss the case with you." End of story. We need a "union" like the Bar Association or AMA. I realize that this is a little snobby but I'm so tried of people who sat in the back of the class for their whole lifes grabbing a hold of a little info and acting as if they are a "tech head" or engineer.

I'm done with my rant, comments please.


jck26

 

[Heckler]

I'm joining the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen?

http://www.ble.org/info/engineer.asp

 

[dvd]

I'm with jck26. Until we engineers get rid of our do-nothing (for us) engineering societies and establish associations such as the AMA and ABA where we can more closely control our destinies, nothing will change.

Another reason that we don't have the status of other professions is that engineering doesn't deal with human emotions. When an individual can heal someone or right some real or perceived wrong, then people will pay dearly for those services. We work with inanimate objects. Since there isn't the same urgency to fix the problems people can shop around for the lower price. No emotions means no money

 

[GregLocock]

"let's not pretend that engineering is by far the most difficult undergraduate curriculum that a university can offer. "

I think that says more about your uni, than engineering.

In my uni engineers had the highest work load apart from lawyers. To get in I had to get AAB at A level, back when A levels were difficult. 40% of my collge intake moved into different courses, or left, in the first year.

In Australia an engineering degree contains enough maths to count as 75% of a Maths degree.

So, which course is more difficult, exactly?

Actually I was hoping never to see this thread on Eng-Tips. It has been proved time and time again that we won't do the necessary to get better recognition.


Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[swivel63]

we all know engineers are the backbone of society. without engineers, there's nothing.

 

[atlas06]

Not to worry, the climate is changing, soon enough everyone will be looking for engineers to save the world, or move to another planet.
But then again, "the for-profit governing societies" will probably find a way to take the credit and make us irrelevant.

 

[IRstuff]

The question of AMA and ABA have come up before. Engineers have PE boards in every US state, with little impact on "status." Making all engineers PEs will not help, because it's a cultural problem, endemic in the simple fact that most people are not physics, or math-oriented

Bottomline is that both doctors and lawyers have relatively immediate battles; disease, or other lawyers. These are things that can be filmed or written about. What a doctor or lawyer does in everyday life has little resemblance to college homework.

This is not case with engineers. Our battles are with equations, stresses, requirements, etc. It's BORING to regular people because it actually does resemble college homework. And the battles are long-term, months, or years, as opposed to days, in the case of doctors and lawyers.

The reality is that engineers will NEVER have the same status, because what we do is totally inaccessible to the average person. Most people think they know something about medicine or have had direct brushes with the law. How many people have even remotely done a real engineering problem?

Even with NGC, History Channel, Discovery Channel, TLC, etc., their science and engineering programs are short on the gruntwork engineering and long on stuff that's visually stimulating. But, in the end, it's all still hocus-pocus to most people. They have zero insight and zero understanding, and without that, they'll never bestow "status" to engineers.

TTFN

 

[GregLocock]

I worked on a particular problem for something like 18 months. Finally, I cracked it. I had a good usable solution. So I plotted the test results out on a graph and was so pleased, I took it home to show my girlfriend (a nurse). She looked at it and said, "Oh so its wiggly lines".

Ego deflating? Yes.



Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[corus]

I think Greg has hit the nail on the head. Everyone knows what a Doctor of Medicine does, but a Doctor of Wiggles doesn't carry the same weight somehow.
Personally I think the term engineer covers such a wide area that its meaning has been effectively watered down to such an extent that it means little. The correlation with salary goes without saying.
As a mathematician (and hence 75% an engineer by the definition above) my job title used to be Stress Analyst rather than Stress Engineer. To strangers an Analyst carried much more weight than being an ordinary Engineer, even though when asked what I did for a living people would ask if Stress was the cause of their sleep problems. I'd start thinking of a new name and leave engineering to road diggers.

corus

 

[mshimko]

What's An Engineer?

An engineer to some is the guy you call when your kitchen faucet won't shut off.

An engineer to some is the guy who drives the train.

An engineer to some is the guy who picks up the curbside garbage.

Oh, an engineer is also a degreed professional.

Unfortunately, I don't see this changing. I see society as a whole understanding less about "logical principles" than in the past, and isn't logic (along with sicentific principles) the basis of engineering? I see it in politics where both the arguements of both sides is 99% rhetoric, and most of the public buys it! I see it on TV game shows where a question involving basic algebra is considered almost "rocket science".

I suppose, in the USA, part of the very problem is the free thinking that helped make this nation great. Many inventors were not degreed engineers or scientists, and in a free market based society money is, fortunately or unfortunetly, the ultimate measure of success. Hence, it's not the inventor/scientist/engineer who gets recognition and rich; it's the guy with better marketing and business savy.

Next, our (society's) lack of critical thinking has allowed lawyers to sue, AND WIN, for anything and everything. In the real world, nothing is ever designed or built perfectly; yet lawyers have been successful in winning multi-million dollar suits based primarily on this premise. In this vein, I recall an article I read, probably 20 years ago when Japan's economy was booming, the article highlighted a difference between Japan and the USA. In Japan, there was 50 engineers for every lawyer. In the USA, it's only 2:1 (per my memory and this article, that is). When you consider that engineers essentially BUILD THINGS, and lawyers essentially PREVENT you from building things, it's no wonder many folks just don't see engineers in the same light as doctors.

OK, my rant is over. Next...

 

[michfan]

I went to college for about 9 years, got a masters and two bachelors. Started a job for one of the biggest companies in the world. My title (an ISO thing) was Structural Engineer. After a year I had done such a great job (by my manager's standards...I still really didn't know what I was doing) I got a 10% raise and a promotion to "Engineer" and was told to coordinate two others' workloads (not supervise, just coordinate--to supervise would have meant a bigger raise/different title, I'm sure.)

He dropped the Structural because he was too lazy to write up a new ISO description (he told me so in those exact words) and I got lumped in with 10 other project engineers. The new title meant I could run jobs up to $500k in size.

I ended up working in England for a year, "coordinating" a site with more than $10M in structural content. Hmm, that was about 20x more than what my title said I was capable of running...

Doesn't matter what your title is...you know what you do and if the place where you work can't appreciate you, move on til you find a place that does. My family has no clue what I do every day. When I start to explain problems on the job their eyes glaze over and they change the subject.

As for the company, they could call me Lead Trash Taker-Outer as long as I can pay my bills each month.

 

[ubrben]

For me, the biggest step forward would be to split the CEng procedure into an administrative/project management stream, and a purely technical stream.

Doctors and lawyers do a specific and narrow role. Being an engineer for me is applied physics, quite why my professional qualification should involve so much business administration and the unspoken assumption that I should want to become a paper pushing manager to earn more money is beyond me.

A large amount of "professional engineering" qualifications aren't appealing to lots of people like me who are entitled to call ourselves engineers.

Ben

 

[corus]

I don't think engineers do applied applied physics in the true sense from what I've seen. If that were the case then they'd be called Physicists and be held in some awe. It seems to me that the problem, in the UK at least, is that the CEng is merely awarded because you pay a fee and have shown you've been alive for a few years after graduating. It's not a qualification as such that you've been examined on and have passed a certain mark. I think it's different in the US with PE and different with other professions such as Chartered Accountants, Surveyors etc. The problem with the US system is that they used an acronymn as a description. That may go down well with management consultants but for me PE says Physical Education and that doesn't impress me at all. What they call themselves in other countries, and what qualifications ranks them as such I have no idea.

corus