Your Opinions on ASCE 12

I wish they could do a better job of putting U.S. Customary/Imperial units in parentheses when their published articles cite metric units.

I see that in recent years ASCE has been an advocate for increased spending by the US Gov't on infrastructure. This may or may not be the most appropriate role for them as their advocacy is based on increasing their membership business. So the question, which is highly philosophical, is whether a civil engineering society should focus on the technical ends of engineering, the public awareness of the profession, the policing of the profession's ethical condition, or the politics of funding project to promote their member's business....some or all of the above?

JAE-

I don't mean this as an offense, more as a clarification. Your second statement is a classic example of a logical fallacy. The fact that ASCE benefits from advocating for increased spending on infrastructure has absolutely no bearing on whether or not the spending should occur.

I think it should. We are a bit odd in this country (US) with many issues. We demand first world infrastructure but are appalled at the idea of paying for it. It is VERY expensive to build and properly maintain highways and bridges, yet every year there is an outcry because property taxes and gasoline taxes and whatever taxes are way too high.

frv,

I don't think that is odd. It is the same scenario in every country as far as I know.

frv - no offense. Just not sure what logical fallacy you are talking about?

All I said in the second sentence is that it is arguable whether the ROLE of ASCE should include a focus on lobbying for gov't spending which will in fact increase business for ASCE's membership....or should their role be purely technical and PR in terms of marketing the profession.

There is no logical issue within my sentence...just a question.

Your second statement is a classic example of a logical fallacy.

Click to expand...

Do elucidate. In what way is it a "logical fallacy"? How is it a "classic example"?

I wish they would represent the smaller firms more.

I really wish I would not get 2-3 Seminar fliers everyday. Just for fun I kept count last year, I stopped when the pile hit 200. No wonder they have to charge $1300 per seminar, 95% of that fee goes to the mailings.

I really wish they would allow more local chapters. We have to travel 3 hours to a meeting yet we have several Civil Engineering firms in our town.

I was a member for a short while and though I though they did some things better than other engineering organisations I did not think that there was much benefit of membership.

That said, if the ASCE does not lobby for infrastructure then who will?

Upon rereading your sentence, JAE, you weren't really insinuating what I had originally read into it.

I had originally read it as "ASCE advocates for increased infrastructure spending because it is in their best interest to do so, as they will increase their membership". That's not really what you said. You were simply asking whether it should be the role of ASCE to do so. So I was incorrect.

So what logical fallacy I had originally assumed is irrelevant, as I misunderstood the statement (in my defense, I had been drinking ).

frv
Drinking does tend to create logical fallacies where normally none exist. But they always seem to be gone when you wake up in the morning.

Ya gotta enjoy a good polite smackdown. Thanks JAE and frv. <grin>

Regarding ASCE, the organization is built on the contributions of individual member engineers, but it seems that they cater more to corporate interests than to its paying membership.

It's not that they don't do some really good things, but when was the last time anyone heard ASCE adovcating for increased compensation for its members? Instead they ask members to go out and recruit high schoolers (and even grade school children now) to ensure that there is an adequate "supply" of engineers for future endevours. If I recall macroeconomics correctly, increasing supply holds the cost of the product (in our case us engineers) to lower levels. How is this seen as serving the membership?

Oh and when was the last time ASCE gave anything back to the membership for free. Everything costs money and not just a little. ASCE has one of the highest costs for obtaining professional development hours in the industry from courses on the national level. (Thank goodness for section meetings) Even the salary survey, which ASCE conducts each year asks for survey contributions from its membership, but once compiled, the survey report must be purchased by the very membership that contributes to the survey. Only the labor classification for which the member engineer contribues survey information is free of charge.

Now take AISC on the other hand. They offer loads of practical useable technical information, oodles of software, and low cost seminars to their membership. Oddly enough, this organization is based on the contributions of member companies, but the organization caters mainly to its individual membership.

Don't get me wrong, I've been an ASCE member since 1986 and have proudly served my section for many years on technical committees, organizing seminars, serving on the Board of Directors and even as section president. I have made some great friends in the process, but I am simply burned out giving while the organization continues to take.

LobstaEata - do you know how I can link your post to ASCE? I sure would like them to read it. Well said.

JAE

Thanks for the kudos. I wish it wasn't so.

Regarding posting to ASCE's site, unfortunately it doesn't seem to do much good to voice pleas to the deaf. I brought up these concerns as section president years ago and brought the compensation concern of our membership directly to the national president at the national convention. He actually confirmed that ASCE's high school recruiting drive was in fact an effort to increase supply and influence engineer salaries. (It was an eye opening experience) He did not offer to take this issue up as a legitimate concern at the national level, which spoke volumes about the organization's intention to represent the interest of corporations over the member engineer.

Lobsta,
I want to make sure I understand you correctly. ASCE is purposely trying to put downward pressure on Civil Engineers' salaries?

One of the reasons why I asked this question was because a very highly regarded professor made a comment that a goal of ASCE's was to keep engineers salaries low.

If it really is true, WOW, this profession is a lot more broken than I thought.

B16A2

You understand correctly. I never said anything about my conversation with that particular ASCE national president, because at the time there was so much momentum for advancing the HS recruitment program and I just started the term as president of my section, so there were certain expecations for me to tow the line. I now regret being afraid to speak up for fear of no believing me or worse making value judgements regarding my own intentions and negatively affecting professional relationships and my own career.

Now that I am older, I have recently written blogs about how active recruiting in high schools as promoted by ASCE (and now for elementary school children) as noble it may seem, might have a negative effect on professional salaries and result in the continued treatment of engineers as commodities.

Please bear in mind that I think ASCE still has done lots of good for its membership in other ways, albeit costly. There are many good people working tirelessly on technical committees to advance knowledge throughout the profession for example, which is a testament to the dedication of ASCE's individual membership to improve the organization.

I simply beleive that ASCE's policy has lost its way as a vehicle to improve the living standards of the individual engineer that contributes to and sustains the organization.

LobstaEata,

Good posts. You touch on a few of the things that I wanted to say in my last post but didnt have the time to, these are also some of the reasons why I am no longer a member.

I assure you that the ASCE is not the only civil engineering organisation with these types of issues. One of my previous employers in Australia lost a 100K job to a big firm only to find out that that firm had come in at 30k and shipped the whole design process overseas to asia. When he complained about the whole situation at the next commitee meeting it fell on deaf ears - so he left. The problem is that many of the fellows running these organisations are directors of companies and make their money off the backs of junior engineers, they also forget what it is like to be a graduate.

That said, a major reason why I stopped being a member was the crazy prices you still had to pay for any king of conference, not much under $600. In Australia and in the Uk there are IEAust and IStructE conferences in the evenings for free or sometimes $10 if a caterer is used.

I agree that AISC is miles ahead virtually anyone in the US as far as cost effective CPD.

Why would a professional organization advocate increased spending in their area of expertise, but at the same time want to decrease the salaries of their members by doing more recruiting?

Is it some kind of elitist conspiracy? Do the leaders of ASCE hold positions in their respective companies that would allow them to greatly benefit from this type of plan.

I have always felt that ASCE had very little to offer in terms of benefits for general membership. Everything they have costs extra, unlike AISC and even now ACI (who offers 3 free papers a year and access to code references).

They also want to increase recruiting and yet at the same time increase the amount of education required for licensure. It seems counter productive. How do you convince someone to go to school longer to make less money?

I don't even know what I am supposed to think, the world's gone crazy.

I personally don't see any immediate benefit to ASCE membership. Their classes are marginally cheaper for members, but outrageously priced either way. Any benefits I get from government lobying come whether I'm a member or not.
I'd rather place my money with an organization like NCSEA and it's constituent local organizations. their professional development prices are reasonable, and their publications are top rate.
I cancelled my ASCE membership 5 years ago and still get at least two seminar mailers a week.