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.

 

[IRstuff]

Most of you have been focusing on the wrong thing.

Consider the licesing of doctors, which is what is often cited as a model for the licensing of engineers. What is not pointed out is that doctors have a multi-tiered system that determines the net income and area of expertise as well. This comes in the form of specialization and board certification. Even the lowest rung, which is the Family Medicine requires board certification, otherwise, you would simply be a General Practitioner and not allowed to do certain things. A Surgeon, whether, general or cosmetic, likewise requires BOTH longer training periods AND board certifications.

Even if all engineers were forceably licensed, you would need to create a separate tiering so that ONLY those that are qualified and trained are allowed to design and engineer public structures, etc. General purpose engineers would still have to legally constrained from performing these engineering tasks.

Without a separate tiering, the competitive pool for public services would essentially double, since all engineers would be legally allowed to offer their services, including those that are only moonlighting. This would contract the salary scales, not expand them.

Scarcity is what increases renumeration, not increased competition. That's why there's a limited number of residency spots available every year, coupled with the 5+ yr residencies to cull out the specialists that make the big bucks. A typical surgeon can easily pull in 3 times the salary of the typical family practitioner.

TTFN

 

[BJC]

IR stuff
A couple of things about doctors ( and lawyers). Doctors and Lawyers regulate their own groups. The AMA and the Bar are run by doctors and lawyers for doctors and lawyers. Engineers don't have a comparable organization. Those that exist -NSPE and IEEE for two are controlled by management and not run for Joe Engineer.
The other thing is that the general public will need a doctor in their lifetime and probabley a lawyer as well. Most of them will never need an engineer or knows what one does.

 

[EddyC]

My Dad was a Doctor who immigrated to the USA after being educated in a foreign country. He was allowed to work in the USA on the premise that he would get his state license. If he failed after a certain period of time, he would have to leave medicine. It wouldn't bother me one bit if engineering was like this too.

IRStuff,

Some states have dicipline specific PE licensing (Mechanical, Electrical, Civil, etc).

In addition:

One of my neighbors decided to do an extensive regrading of his backyard. Part of the project involved the construction of a retaining wall at the property line. The adjoining neighbor saw what was going on and did some inquiries. The project was being done without a construction permit and the retaining wall was not designed by a Licensed Professional Engineer. The town was called and put a stop to the project until the proper procedure was followed. I wouldn't care if the retaining wall was being designed by Burt Rutan, if you don't have a PE you shouldn't be doing it.

 

[IRstuff]

I have no disagreement able when a PE is required. Those who do such projects without an engineer are idiots and making all engineers PEs would still leave them as idiots.

Regulation, even by the AMA is a joke. As with the priesthood, sins are generally glossed over. There are lots of cases where so-called doctors with multitudes of malpractice judgements against them still practicing. Even with the alleged oversight, there are sill idiot customers, case in point is where a well-known psychiatric institution suddenly found out that their director of 10 yrs had neither MD nor even a basic degree.

My issue is with the concept of making all engineers PEs as a panacea for low wages and protection of the "engineer" title.

The purpose of the PE act is public safety and THAT should and must remain its primary raison d'etre. To use it for other purposes will only dilute its limited abilities to regulate the profession. The public, when it's paying attention at all, must have a clear, unambiguous means of determining whether an engineer offering his services has the appropriate credentials and certifications for doing the job.

TTFN

 

[GregLocock]

That's fine EddyC, if Rutan wants to start designing garden walls he needs a PE. No problem. Since he doesn't (I guess) then he doesn't need a PE.

ScottyUK, your examples are good, but they are NOT caused by the sanitation engineer nomenclature silliness.



Cheers

Greg Locock

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

 

[HgTX]

"sanitation engineer" is an extreme silliness like "lawn doctor". But the issue of technicians labeled as engineers and doing jobs that are almostbutnotquite engineering is a real one.

Hg

Eng-Tips guidelines: faq731-376

 

[EddyC]

For that matter, how do I or anyone know that Burt Rutan has designed anything? How do I know that it wasn't his employees that did the engineering and that he just claimed the credit. Companies and owners make statements implying that they personally did the work themselves all the time. Was the Boeing 777 designed by someone named Boeing?

 

[haggis]

Ron

I suggest you reread my postings. I do not call myself an engineer and do not misrepresent myself to the public as being licensed.

 

[BobPE]

GregLocock:

If Rutan engineered anything for anyone outside of his company, hw would need a PE. I would imagine he would want the ability to do something like that, maybe not though...


IRStuff:

In my little world, the PE would be a world requirement...I do not discriminate because of boarders...

The industrial exemption would cease to exist and that overabundance on engineers you site would evaporate as now industry would have to use licensed engineers, of which, there would not be many that would be able to pass the necessary requirements (assumption on my part). This would lead to greater control of the profession by us, and lead to good things like higher wages. So I don't see your argument.

Bob

 

[ScottyUK]

Greg,

...are NOT caused by the sanitation engineer nomenclature silliness.

Actually I think they are the outcome of it. When people are allowed to use the title 'engineer' indiscriminately when they are nothing of the sort, eventually they start to believe that because they have managed to misappropriate the engineer's title, they can actually do the engineer's work. After that it is a downward spiral.


----------------------------------

If we learn from our mistakes,
I'm getting a great education!

 

[EddyC]

The employers are the ones who want to prevent the engineering workforce from being licensed. A licensed engineering workforce would have power and the ability to demand higher wages and higher quality work, almost like a union. The employers are the ones who obtained exemptions into the licensing laws, for their own benefit, not for the benefit of society. And now that 80% of engineers in the USA find themselves unlicensed and virtually uninformed about licensure, they too have a vested interest in preventing licensure. An argument could also be made on behalf of universal engineering licensure for the profession. The USA is being swamped by 3rd world "engineers" with unknown qualifications. This situation make licensure even more of an imperative.

 

[IRstuff]

So the guys at "Rug Doctor" think they're doctors?

http://www.rugdoctor.com/

TTFN

 

[patdaly]

Well, this thread is getting more and more like the pseudo engineer thread all the time.
Funny thing, a couple friends and I were cleaning up an unused park, nothing huge, but a nice community project. To make this park useable, a small pedestrian bridge was needed to replace one that the vandals had burned. Now, I was willing to build a heck for strong steel and concrete one, out of my own pocket and labor. I am in fact, a degreed ME, though not ( nor ever intend to be ) a PE. Though technically in the wrong, I was willing to risk it for the public "good". As things progressed, the others wanted recgonition, and formed a not for profit, got pats on the back from the city, etc. Now, I am forced to say I will be no part of this project, and guess what? Totally untrained people are building another wooden structure, which, if not burned by vandals, will have no form of engineering expertise applied, all in the name of the law. Is this how we intend to keep the public safe?
I guess the point is, while we certainly would not want a person such as myself designing skyscrapers or boilers ( then again, perhaps we do as I overengineer everything ), we can also carry, for the sake of politics and the retention of salaries, this to a level which may actually endanger public safety.
Another point, as my hobby, I build race cars, by the definition thrown around here, I would be in violation, for certainly adding structure and designing and making parts for said race car is Engineering.........yet Billy up the street that can cut and weld would have no problem?
Somewhere between the camp who call themselves Engineer without so much as a degree, and those who believe only a LPE should be allowed to call themselves Engineer, lies the best shot at true public safety.

 

[BobPE]

IRstuff...if your carpet is sick that would be a good call for someone...,but what is the point you are trying to make?

patdaly:

since you are not a PE it certainly may be illegal for you to proceed, so good call. But as for the ethical duties, a PE would know exactly what to do in this case. the non-PE, thankfully would have this forum here to seek help. I suggest that if you are exposed ti illegal or suspect practice of engineering, you should contact your state licensure board and fill out the necessary paperwork to report the incident. A PE would face fines if they did not report unlicensed practice...for other non-PE's, they face no fines however, you have special knowledge of the practice occuring, so you may become a part of the problem if you do not handle this correctly.

"Somewhere between the camp who call themselves Engineer without so much as a degree, and those who believe only a LPE should be allowed to call themselves Engineer, lies the best shot at true public safety." ---- you are wrong, and could be potentially be dead wrong...

You example only solidifies the importance of licensure and elimination of the confusion. People think they can engineer...without licensure...that is the system we have now, and what I strive to change....

Bob

 

[EddyC]

patdaly,

The public is never endangered by engineering licensure.

I have seen plenty of welds done by "Billy Up The Street". I told one of these "welders" once that he had done a weld that endangered the occupants of the building and that I would have him thrown in jail for attempted murder if I could.

Like a lot of MEs you have been involved with cars and racing (Me too). And as you know, only the very upper end of racing has cars that are engineered. Well I heard a story from a racer friend of mine about a driver who commissioned a racecar builder to make a new car for him that would blow away the competition. This new car was way too light structurally and when it finally made contact with the wall, as every racecar eventually does, it came apart and injured the driver severely. The driver ended up with numerous medical problems that caused his death a few months later. This led to changes in the rulebook on the minimum structural properties that a racecar must have before being considered safe.

 

[haggis]

Being in an industry exempt position, I would like to make a point on behalf of those who are in the same. I design equipment in a manufacturing environment. Equipment that is potentially dangerous if meddled in by the wrong people. I design, supervise it’s fabrication, construction and implementation without the assistance or supervision of a PE.

My immediate “supervisor” is a PE as are those above him and does nothing but arrange time lines, manage budgets and write job sheets to arrange the necessary manpower. The only official act I have seen him perform in 20 years was to sign a passport photograph for a coworker stating that the applicant was known to him for x amount of years and that the picture was a true likeness.

How do they get their PE’s? The company hires them after graduation and puts them in a “supervisory” position to eventually obtain a PE. For some reason, company policy has always been to hire engineering graduates and let them ride it out doing basically clerical work. Some who discovered this early, are long gone to pursue what they wanted to do…be an engineer.

So, what is scary? Experienced designers in exempt positions, or these guys who could leave (but won’t) and hang their shingles, offer engineering services in the public sector and be completely within the law.

In no way am I saying that this situation is common but it does exist and anyone who attains PE status under these conditions is doing a diservice to themselves and the profession as a whole. Those who strongly advocate PE status across the board would now have the dangerous element in the public sector among them whereas the industry exempt are kept at bay.

 

[BobPE]

haggis:

I am assuming you have been in industry your entire career? Step back and look at what you wrote. You look silly saying that about those people. Dangerous element? How do you know that? Keep it focused....

you contributions are good here and I enjoy the banter, but please, don't stoop to what appears to me to be a misinformed assumption about a group of people.

Bob

 

[EngJW]

The definitions being thrown around here are approaching the absurd. The term "engineer" is too broad for any person, group, or state to claim ownership of it without attaching something like PE, registered, professional, or licensed. I know what I am- a graduate mechanical engineer with 30 years experience in machine design, and I will shout it from the mountaintop and don't care if the folks in NJ are offended by it. I also know what I'm not- I'm not a PE and there are certain projects that I could not legally work on or at least sign off on.

To imply that the people who have designed cars, computers, factories, and all our toys are not engineers is rediculous.

 

[IRstuff]

My point is that NO ONE confuses a "rug doctor" with an MD nor would anyone seriously think that a "sanitation engineer" is anything but a garbage collector.

Doctors are licensed AND scarcity controlled, and you have "Rug Doctor." Licensing will NOT eliminate spurious titles, primarily because they are indeed spurious. Trademark infringement case law has plenty of precedents that allow usage of even trademarked terms, when there is clearly no possibility of confusion about the overlapping of trademarks.

Since "engineer" is hardly a trademark, no law that would propose to restrict the usage of "engineer" in a non-engineering usage would be enforceable.

TTFN

 

[EddyC]

One of my M.D. (Doctor) friends told me a story about someone he interfaced with during his residency. This individual was refered to as "Doctor". Everyone assumed that she was an M.D. It turned out that she was a nurse with a Phd in biology. My friend thought that her use of "Doctor" was very misleading and inappropriate in this particular work setting.

EngJW,

Most of the folks that I meet in the engineering community do not know about engineering licensure. Most find out about it late in their careers, at which time it becomes onerous to obtain. I fell into this catagory as well, but managed to become a PE anyway. Now that you as well as others on this forum have become informed, it is now your duty to get your PE. You can no longer claim ignorance.