This is referencing thread730-373612 which is a closed thread.
I am contemplating moving to another state from my current Texas address. I've lived here for 22 years, and loved it, but (according to She Who Must Be Obeyed) it's time to move on.
The new state of residence happens to be one of these that has adopted S.E. licensing, along with many others - NOT Texas, thank heaven.
Now, it's not really that I disagree with the notion of separate licensing entirely - though the reference in the O.P. in thread730-373612, I think, hit the nail on the head when he mentioned "guildism" which was something that first appeared in Europe in the late middle ages, and was intended to keep the number of practitioners of a craft as low as possible, to make their fees as HIGH as possible. Well, I'd love to have my fees as high as possible, but in the current climate, where owners, architects, and developers see engineering as an off-the-shelf commodity, I suspect they will find ways to circumvent that somehow - possibly by prevailing upon legislators to pull at least some of the teeth of the law regulating engineering licensure.
But anyway, what I really have in mind is this.
WHAT THE HELL WERE THESE PEOPLE THINKING THEY WERE GOING TO DO WITH PRACTICING P.E.s WHO HAVE BEEN DOING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING FOR YEARS BUT WOULD FIND IT NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO OBTAIN SE LICENSURE THE WAY THE LAWS ARE CONSTRUCTED?????
I'll give you an example I know well - MY OWN!
I'm 59, and have been a licensed professional engineer for thirty years. It was EXACTLY thirty years ago this month, that I took and passed the P.E. exam in another state (not Texas), and I have at one time or another been a licensed professional engineer in six or seven states. During that time, I have been doing structural engineering at least 90% of the time, with a little civil thrown in to keep things interesting. Never, at any time, have I been "under the responsible charge" of a licensed STRUCTURAL engineer. And in fact, it has been at least TWENTY years since I've been UNDER ANY ENGINEER except myself!
Well, let's look at the requirements in the state where I am almost certainly going to be locating.
According to their board rules, to become a licensed professional structural engineer, as they term it, you must:
1. Be a licensed P.E.
2. Take and pass ALL FOUR sections of the SE exam (Vertical Buildings, Vertical Bridges, Lateral Buildings, Lateral Bridges) - Note that FAILING ANY ONE of these four sections means you fail the whole thing, and will have to retake ALL FOUR SECTIONS.
3. Have the following experience VERIFIED BY A LICENSED S.E. UNDER WHOSE RESPONSIBLE CHARGE THE WORK WAS PERFORMED:
4. Have the following experience in AT LEAST ONE of the following areas, also verified by an S.E.:
(NOTE That under 3. and 4., the total number of "hours spent" in doing these various activities must be supplied, and verified by an S.E. in charge.
Now, what this all means is that I, EVEN IF I TAKE AND PASS THE EXAMS, would find it nearly impossible to meet the "experience" requirement of the laws of this state, even though I've been doing structural engineering for literally decades, because there's virtually no way in hell I will be able to have this verified by an S.E. since I've only ever worked with ONE, for a short time about ten years back!
WHAT WERE THEY THINKING????????
"No one is completely useless. He can always serve as a bad example." --My Dad ca. 1975
I am contemplating moving to another state from my current Texas address. I've lived here for 22 years, and loved it, but (according to She Who Must Be Obeyed) it's time to move on.
The new state of residence happens to be one of these that has adopted S.E. licensing, along with many others - NOT Texas, thank heaven.
Now, it's not really that I disagree with the notion of separate licensing entirely - though the reference in the O.P. in thread730-373612, I think, hit the nail on the head when he mentioned "guildism" which was something that first appeared in Europe in the late middle ages, and was intended to keep the number of practitioners of a craft as low as possible, to make their fees as HIGH as possible. Well, I'd love to have my fees as high as possible, but in the current climate, where owners, architects, and developers see engineering as an off-the-shelf commodity, I suspect they will find ways to circumvent that somehow - possibly by prevailing upon legislators to pull at least some of the teeth of the law regulating engineering licensure.
But anyway, what I really have in mind is this.
WHAT THE HELL WERE THESE PEOPLE THINKING THEY WERE GOING TO DO WITH PRACTICING P.E.s WHO HAVE BEEN DOING STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING FOR YEARS BUT WOULD FIND IT NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO OBTAIN SE LICENSURE THE WAY THE LAWS ARE CONSTRUCTED?????
I'll give you an example I know well - MY OWN!
I'm 59, and have been a licensed professional engineer for thirty years. It was EXACTLY thirty years ago this month, that I took and passed the P.E. exam in another state (not Texas), and I have at one time or another been a licensed professional engineer in six or seven states. During that time, I have been doing structural engineering at least 90% of the time, with a little civil thrown in to keep things interesting. Never, at any time, have I been "under the responsible charge" of a licensed STRUCTURAL engineer. And in fact, it has been at least TWENTY years since I've been UNDER ANY ENGINEER except myself!
Well, let's look at the requirements in the state where I am almost certainly going to be locating.
According to their board rules, to become a licensed professional structural engineer, as they term it, you must:
1. Be a licensed P.E.
2. Take and pass ALL FOUR sections of the SE exam (Vertical Buildings, Vertical Bridges, Lateral Buildings, Lateral Bridges) - Note that FAILING ANY ONE of these four sections means you fail the whole thing, and will have to retake ALL FOUR SECTIONS.
3. Have the following experience VERIFIED BY A LICENSED S.E. UNDER WHOSE RESPONSIBLE CHARGE THE WORK WAS PERFORMED:
Use of three of the following four materials as they relate to the design, rehabilitation or investigation of buildings or structures: steel, concrete, wood; or masonry.
Selection of framing systems including the consideration of alternatives and the selection of an appropriate system for the interaction of structural components to support vertical and lateral loads.
Selection of foundation systems including the consideration of alternatives and the selection of an appropriate type of foundation systems to support the structure.
Design and detailing for the transfer of forces between stories in multi-stories buildings or structures.
Applications of lateral design in the design of the buildings or structures in addition to any wind design requirements.
Applications of the local, state and federal code requirements as they relate to design loads, materials, and detailing.
4. Have the following experience in AT LEAST ONE of the following areas, also verified by an S.E.:
Structural design of any building or structure two stories and more, or 45 feet in height, located in a region of moderate or high seismic risk designed in accordance with current codes adopted pursuant to [state law].
Structural design for a major seismic retrofit/rehabilitation of an existing building or structure located in a region of moderate or high seismic risk.
Structural design of any other structure of comparable structural complexity.
(NOTE That under 3. and 4., the total number of "hours spent" in doing these various activities must be supplied, and verified by an S.E. in charge.
Now, what this all means is that I, EVEN IF I TAKE AND PASS THE EXAMS, would find it nearly impossible to meet the "experience" requirement of the laws of this state, even though I've been doing structural engineering for literally decades, because there's virtually no way in hell I will be able to have this verified by an S.E. since I've only ever worked with ONE, for a short time about ten years back!
WHAT WERE THEY THINKING????????
"No one is completely useless. He can always serve as a bad example." --My Dad ca. 1975
