Titles: Engineer vs. Designer 25

[haggis]

This has been beaten to death in the past but let's get some opinions.

Of course it makes perfect sense as to whether some of us have to be degreed or licensed depending on what field of endeavor we enter. But…..Let’s all get over the title thing as to whether one is entitled to call him/herself an engineer rather than a designer. As long as nobody misrepresents themselves as being degreed or licensed and practicing as such when in fact they are not. True, some jurisdictions have already reserved the title “engineer” solely for those who are licensed and it is wrong.

The American Medical Association have not yet objected to the terms lawn doctor or tree surgeon simply because these people are not implying they have a degree or a license.

At the end of the day if we’ve designed something that is of benefit to our way of life and done so in a safe and responsible manner, we can choose to say if we wish, we engineered it. Degreed, licensed or otherwise, we have all earned it and the number of years I have spent in the engineering community, I still find that we learn from each other constantly.

 

[crossframe]

Correct.

 

[rcass]

I call myself a Mechanical Designer. I do not have an engineering degree. I do have 20+ years experience designing and fabricating. When asked by those who don't understand what a mechanical designer is, I reply "a non-degreed engineer" as it is easier understood and I follow up with "I do engineering type work". I would never represent myself as a licensed engineer as I lack all the knowledge an engineer should have. I would be so bold and say I could do a better job in some areas than Bobpe. I know several people with the experience and knowledge to qualify as an "engineer". I've also seen too many instances where a "Title" didn't make a hill of beans to their actual capabilities. There are ASE certified mechanics out there that can screw up a car just as easy as my daughter who hasn't a technical bone in her body. I've also known guys that can design and build anything and aren't ASE certified.

I worked in the aircraft industry for most of my adult life. I can assure you when GE designs an engine, it goes through plenty of analysis before being tested (disclaimer: never been employed by GE). Same goes for all components long before they're assembled to form an aircraft. Where I worked, there wasn't one PE though all were degreed engineers. I made many design improvements (some inovative) to the product line I delt with and most are perfoming well on aircraft around the world. Those that aren't were revised or replaced.

What I get from BobPE's posts is; if a PE had put his stamp on everything ever made we wouldn't have any plane crashes, building colapses, product recalls. That presumption is totally absurd. How many products are successful. Not market successes, but durable, reliable and safe products used everyday and had no PE involvement whatsoever. I'm not against licensing but it is not the cure all as BobPE would have you think. If you need a system to regulate engineering, pattern it like the auto repair industry. Certify for a given area of engineering. Show competency in the area you're seeking license in (even the FAA requires A&P candidates to perform hands-on tasks and are evaluated over-the-shoulder). Weed out the incompitants, educated or otherwise.

As for me, I'm happy with designer. I don't care about having some title telling me what I know I can or can't do. I know what I can do whether its designing and building a car, a house or a piece of equipment with my own hands. At this point in my life I have no desire to go back to school to get an engineering degree. This was not intended as a BobPE-bashing post but I saw flaws in his thinking even though his intentions are quite noble. I understand the need for some sort of regulation. I think more needs done to standardize job titles/descriptions from the engineering side and then passed down through trade resources to employers.

 

[bioengr82]

"If you need a system to regulate engineering, pattern it like the auto repair industry. Certify for a given area of engineering. Show competency in the area you're seeking license in (even the FAA requires A&P candidates to perform hands-on tasks and are evaluated over-the-shoulder). Weed out the incompitants, educated or otherwise."

Isn't that what a P.E. does?

 

[EddyC]

rcass,

You really can't compare the aerospace industry to the rest of engineering. Very few engineered products are subject to the certification testing that aerospace products are. Think about the other extreme in the world of engineering, namely the AEC field. In this arena the companies are paper entities with few assets. Companies would fold up and reorganize under another name with the same folks doing the same work in the same way, if they got into trouble. Contractors do this routinely. This is why engineering licensing was created, to make the PEOPLE doing the work responsible rather than a faceless entity. Society did this in order to make folks do the right thing. The way it is now, many companies have the ability to do shoddy engineering and then avoid disciplinary action by being under the corporate law umbrella.

 

[rcass]

Bioengr82,

Isn't that what a P.E. does?

I admit I don't know much about the PE process but it doesn't seem to be doing a very good job from my point of view. My point being if it isn't doing the job, change it. Hence the last 2 lines in my last post.

EddyC,

Point taken.

 

[Speedy1]

The topic of who can be called and engineer recently came up and I was accused of being an illegal engineering company due to the fact that my 26 plus years of building and designing aircraft parts did not quailify me as someone who is capable of performing engineering task. Also, it was stated that, I am in no way, by state law, able to design and manufacture parts for customers without a 4 year engineering degree. Here is my question: If the title doesn't matter, then why is it that a kid with a fresh 4 year degree in engineering can be allowed to start-up and engineering company with no experience. My response was to set me up with all the final exams at whatever university of their choice and I will be willing to take those exams. Once I passed them, would that make me any smarter or a better engineer. According to the government the answer is, YES! I do have 2 people on staff with aeronautical engineering degrees, but it took them almost 6 years to learn the ropes before I let them loose on their own! I don't turn my nose up to a good education, but when does experience and accomplishments in a selected field o0f expertise trump a degree? Is it possible for people like myself to find a college or university that can cater to professionals like myself to get that special piece of paper called a degree? I had been given an honorary degree some years ago and that, they said, is usless. Why award an honorary degree if my accomplishments were not noteworthy? Can anyone make sense of any of this?

 

[bioengr82]

Speedy,

I would recommend that you read everything prior to you comment.

 

[Tobalcane]

Speedy1,

“…but when does experience and accomplishments in a selected field o0f expertise trump a degree?”

I think you have to compare apples to apples. If you and another person were looking for a new job and the other has the same experience and accomplishments as you and have a degree to back up the theoretical side, I would guess the other person would get the job.

“If the title doesn't matter, then why is it that a kid with a fresh 4 year degree in engineering can be allowed to start-up [an] engineering company with no experience.”

This can not happen with out a PE licenses, but that person can be a consultant in the ME field to do heat transfer and vibration analysis. You can start up your own company as a consultant, just as long you have a disclaimer that you are not responsible for your design and not use the word “engineer” in any context that you are a PE.

Rcass,
“I would be so bold and say I could do a better job in some areas than Bobpe.”

Yes that may be true, but at the end of the day the PE is responsible for your work (if you were working under him) and his. You may be a better draftsmen or designer, but if the PE does not do the analysis to justify the design, the design will stay on paper.



Go Mechanical Engineering
Tobalcane

 

[IRstuff]

I think that depends on the specifics of the PE act in that state.

In California, it matters not whether you disclaim or not; if you are offering services to other than those companies that claim industrial exemption, you would be in violation of the PE act in California.

TTFN

 

[Speedy1]

To bioengr82,
I do read quite well and I have read the responses that matter and make sence, thank you.

 

[EddyC]

Speedy1,

The PE process is a legal method of determining who has achieved MINIMUM competency as an engineer. The PE is about having VERIFIED credentials. You may indeed be a very good designer, engineer, etc. But how am I or any other fellow human being supposed to know that? How do I know if all your claims of competence are legit? Am I supposed to do some kind of formal investigation to determine your competence? What if you make a mistake due to negligence? If you are not a PE, you will be allowed to continue in your negligence. You work in the aerospace industry. You know full well that new aircraft are subject to certification testing. The PE process is a certification process for engineers. Why would we not want this process?

 

[bioengr82]

That very well be Speed1, however, many of the prior posts that make senSe point out that it is not the four year degree that is required to practice engineering. It is a professional engineering liscense. Anyone can start and own an engineering company regardless of education, as long as they have a P.E. on staff. In many states a four year degree is not required for a P.E. Also, in my opinion, being able to ace every final for a degree in aeronautical engineering would make you a better designer. I simply don't see how it wouldn't.

 

[Speedy1]

In light of my comment about being able to ace the final for an aeronautical engineering degree, I had pretty much done that. I was lacking approx. 4-6 months of studies when I was recruited, along with others, by a defense contractor to do propulsion work with the understanding of having the remander of my degree paid for and time set aside for completion. I am not unique in that many people have had the same experiences. My only problem is that it is well known that going to a university to complete the degree is almost impossible once you are firmly established. The required times are usually from 8am-3pm Mon.- Fri. Can't run a business and go to school and there is never the chance of night school due to the nature of the degree that will be completed. Also, I have not found anywhere an ABET school that can do on line completion. If having the minimum requirements documented are so important, which I do believe it is, my question is how can people who are obviously more than qualified to have the title of engineer and the background to prove it, do so? I think that common sense dictates that the notion that someone with a bachelors degree and 4 years minimum experience is more qualified than someone with decades of experience is not accurate, regardless of certificates or degrees. I hold many Federal licenses and professional licenses and most of them were obtained by ACTUAL FIELD EXPERIENCE. I needed to take all the practical and demonstrated ability test, just like others who obtained them in schools. However, many of them never amounted to much in the aviation field and I was always sought after because my background was almost all built on actual, real life activities with aircraft that were not a part of a "lab". No education can subsitute actual experience. I think that if proven, the actual experiences and accomplishments, the ability for someone to take the required test should be made available.

 

[bioengr82]

Speedy:

The problem isn't that they are not available, the problem is you choose not to take them. Nothing is keeping you from your degree but you. You have evaluated your priorities and choosen to invest your time and energy in your business, probably rightly so. However, this was your choice. The system isn't stacked against you, it is the same for everyone else on this forum. If the recognition a degree brings is what you seek then finish your degree. Sure other areas of your professional life might suffer, but it is YOU who must decide if it is worth it. However, if you have already decided it is not worth the time and energy to finish, please remove that chip from your shoulder.

 

[GregLocock]

EddyC wrote "You really can't compare the aerospace industry to the rest of engineering."

True, but you can compare aerospace to automotive. Since automotive is one of the biggest industry exempt fields of engineering, it is an important point.

Both aerospace and automotive rely on testing prototypes (or increasingly, models or simulations or calculations) to meet federally defined performance standards.

Therefore, our arbiter is not, have we applied the appropriate codes in an intelligent and sufficient fashion? Which is what the PE world is rather biased towards.

Instead one of the the questions we have to satisfy is: when the real thing gets tested against this performance criterion, will it pass? And have we considered sufficient failure criterion? Since not all customer usage is enshrined in the federal codes (by a long chalk).

I think that is quite a different philosophy, and explains many of our (PE vs IE) disagreements.

Cheers

Greg Locock

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

 

[EddyC]

Speedy,

You are most likely highly qualified to do the work that you do. But you must PROVE it and prove it in a legally defined way. The PE is that way. If you truly do have the skills that you claim you do and the experience that you claim you do, you can also pass the PE exam. Until you do this you haven't certified your abilities. We don't let Boeing or Airbus get out of certifying aircraft based upon the extensive experience that both have, do we? Lets remember that the Industrial Exemption applies to industry. It doesn't give industry the right to arbitarily assign the "engineer" title to whom it sees fit.

Greg,

You are absolutely correct that both the aerospace and automotive industries certify their products, thereby proving that they function as designed. This is precisely why Industry has been allowed to have & keep their exemption from utilizing PEs. But don't count on Industry keeping their high standards as time goes by. Do to the insatiable greed on the part of industry leaders, these high standards will take a plunge.

 

[Speedy1]

Biengr82,

A chip on my shoulder? There is none. I jus think that it is very short sighted by all industries to dismiss quality or knowledge due to a piece of paper. I have never lost a contract due to not having a degree but the reliance of one in lue of an established history of performance which can be toatly documented is bunk. As a matter of fact, I can't think of any contract that I have lost. In the last 9 years, my customers have increased in numbers with the complexity of the jobs increasing enormusly. My company success has to do with the fact that the customer knows the quality that they are getting is hard to find especially for numerous, short-run production and that they can benefit from our ability to pull from a variety of diciplines, not because we have degrees in engineering.

 

[bioengr82]

Speedy:

Great! It sounds like you don't need an engineering degree. It also sounds like your the only one with an issue about a four year degree, not your clients. So what exactly is your point about establishing your credientials? From what you say, the system is working just fine for you.

 

[Speedy1]

Bioengr82,

I had posed this question to the state licensing board: How can a degreed inividual with four years experience and a PE sign-off on plans involoving technology/materials that they are remotely familiar with without the proper experience? Under the current regulations, they can, and don't think for one minute that a young, hungry engineer when pressed by his/her superiors will not cave and sign-off on something that they are not completely familiar with. It happens so much that I can fill volumes with examples and it is not just in aviation. This also, will have an effect to the many small, but very good, machine shop around the country. It should be no suprise that all of us who own machine shops do not make it a practice to employ all degreed engineers. For example, if someone comes into my shop with a sketch on a napkin of an idea and I select the materials, design it, machine it, test it, the customer likes it, orders a truck load, and implements it on their product, who then has done the engineering. Some on the board of licensing say that it was the machine shop, while others say that it was the person with the idea. This example, although a little more crude( I only had one napkin drawing this year)is a reality for a lot of machine shops. This is a grey area that no one can give a difinitive answer.

EddyC,

By the way, the end product, if it is an aircraft part, is ALWAYS extensively test flown by ME prior to production so I do know something about the certification of aircraft and aircraft parts. Why not let an individual take the PE test if he or she feels that they can pass it? This is where documented, individual experience should be accepted. Grandfathering used to be a common practice to the state licensing boards up tp 1988 in the states that I have lived in. Why not have a stringent requirement for field experience in obtaining a PE?

 

[EddyC]

Speedy1,

Many states do accept experience in lieu of education. Some don't because verification is too difficult. The PE process does not have only 1 accepted method of licensure qualification. There are several methods. Look into it yourself. But if you're looking to waive the examination, that may or may not be possible. It all depends upon the state in question. Go before the state board. The board has engineers on staff. It is their job to determine who has met the criteria for licensure. You can't expect licensure to be granted to you if you don't bother to go through the formal process. Whether you like it or not, the state governments are involved in the regulation of engineering. Why not try to comply with their rules? Or petition to change them if they are not to your liking.