Remote Engineering
Remote Engineering
(OP)
Check this out: www.plan-source.com
They apparently offer professional engineering services in the USA utilizing a workforce overseas. Their designs are stamped by stateside PEs. I get the impression that this type of business model is not legal, but lets see what others think.
They apparently offer professional engineering services in the USA utilizing a workforce overseas. Their designs are stamped by stateside PEs. I get the impression that this type of business model is not legal, but lets see what others think.





RE: Remote Engineering
Is this really the case? Or is it the case that he couldn't find angineers prepared to work as cheaply?
By the way, while he says he trained his staff in India, I didn't find where he says the plans are stamped by stateside PE's... was it on the site or do you have more detailed knowledge?
Interesting to think of all those Indian Engineers, in India, working on projects in the US.... do thet wonder why they weren't invited to come to the States, re-qualify (as necessary) and enjoy something of the lifestyle they are planning for others?
It seems a bit surreal to me. I have no idea if it is legal or not though I would presume that the plan has been carefully thought out and while some may take exception to it, it may very well be legal.
The art, these days, seems to be finding and exploiting loopholes.
JMW
www.ViscoAnalyser.com
RE: Remote Engineering
I don't like it, but I guess it could be legal. It's no different from farming out some part of your work product to a guy down the street, except for the length of the street, and the worldwide glut of fiberoptic bandwidth has made the distance irrelevant.
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
RE: Remote Engineering
It's called the modern world. Get used to it. If you can't run an engineering design service over the internet and with modern telecommunications, then /you/ are the problem, not the people who can.
Admittedly that may not be preferable for a small office, where the increased overhead of a geographically distributed team is not justified.
Having said that for one of my own projects I tried to arrange a small (40 hour) drafting job in India and decided that it was not worth it. The costs varied from laughable (3$ per hour) to sensible (15$ per hour) but none of the respondees gave the faintest sign they understood what was required, and rather than giving them 40 hours of engineering tuition I did the job myself in 10 boring hours.
That's why on-site contact is important.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
I most often work electronically with many of the 300 +/- employees in my company, and sub-contractors, spread out across the eastern USA. I have never met many folks I work with on projects...clients and co-workers alike. Not that it matters in the least. At the end, the PE who was most in "direct control" - whether me or another - seals the final plots.
Very rarely do I get a job small enought that I do all design, CADD, narratives, meetings, etc. myself. Should I stop doing any job I can't do in my office with my 8 co-workers? Man, I'd be out of business.
Engineering is the practice of the art of science - Steve
RE: Remote Engineering
http://www.lyontechsolutions.com/
RE: Remote Engineering
http://www.nspe.org/govrel/gr2-4065.asp
RE: Remote Engineering
First they adamantly state that all work should be in accordance with the state's laws....most all of which, by the way, state that work must be performed under direct supervision of the engineer of record. Then they go on to say that IF such work is performed, the engineer signing the documents should not be put under duress to sign anything that they aren't comfortable with.
This is ridiculous. If the engineer has the work done under their direct supervision, why would they be put under any duress? Unless they HADN'T had the work done under their direct supervision...
RE: Remote Engineering
If you can, then off-shoring that work is a possibility.
Since, demonstrably, it is possible for any scale of project, the question is, what is it about your process that makes it inadvisable?
There are a lot of good answers to that question, but there are also a lot of bad ones.
Incidentally, when an American company designs a skyscraper for Shanghai, is that off-shoring, or do you have a nicer word for it?
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
RE: Remote Engineering
I have designed yacht exhaust systems for boats I have never seen, built for customers whom I have never met, many of them on the far side of the world.
I'd have to assert that it is possible to supervise/ coordinate the work of others without physical contact, e.g. by phone, fax, email and exchange of CAD files, but it requires extra attention on everyone's part to succeed.
Some of the difficulties that have presented:
- Time differences. Getting a question posed, understood, acknowledged, researched, and answered, can take days when your correspondent is 12 hours out of phase with you.
- Language differences. Not so much among different languages, but among different cultures who nominally speak the same language. Ex: Some folks use a phrase like "would it be possible to do <something> this way..", when they really mean "Please go ahead and do <something> this way..". Actually happened: An Aussie asked would it be possible to do something, etc., I responded yes, and they understood that to mean that I was actually doing it that way. Since I didn't receive a written contract change notice, I went ahead and did it the original way. Bad feelings resulted. Lawyers profited.
- CAD file differences. You will eventually learn ways to repair broken IGES and DXF files, convert from one file format to another, scale both ways between metric and English units, repair drawings that were scaled wrong, deal with missing xrefs and fonts, adjust the world UCS, and more.
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
RE: Remote Engineering
HVAC68
RE: Remote Engineering
Wes C.
------------------------------
No trees were killed in the sending of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
RE: Remote Engineering
"Incidentally, when an American company designs a skyscraper for Shanghai, is that off-shoring, or do you have a nicer word for it?"
wes616 (Aerospace):
"Now I'm not a fan of "offshoring" uness it works in MY benefit!"
Both of you hit on the REAL problem folks in the developed world have with developing nations' competitiveness; whether Japanese cars or Indian engineered design.
Engineering is the practice of the art of science - Steve
RE: Remote Engineering
People in the US forget that less than 70 yrs ago, most people were slaving away 6 days a week in sweat shops trying to beat the Europeans into the business dirt, and succeeded, largely due to two World Wars that crippled Europe for nearly 40 yrs.
Only 40 yrs ago, we conceded our transistor radio industry and then most of the auto industry and most of the semiconductor memory industry to the Japanese.
Only 20 yrs ago, Reagan's State Department nixed the purchase of Fairchild Semiconductor by Fujitsu, who was so enamored with Fairchild, their corporate logo was laid out identically to Fairchild's, except it was blue instead of red.
Globalization has been going for over 2000 yrs; there's no new news here. Surely, the weaver's guilds of Middle Ages Europe must have complained bitterly about the trade in Far Eastern silks and other fabrics?
The US and its industrial revolution totally altered the balance of industrial power for over 100 yrs. It's simply our turn...
TTFN
RE: Remote Engineering
The US is somewhat of a unique country in that it allows local states a level of independence in making laws that govern human behavior. Over the years, the US has gone heavy into Federal power (via the world wars) but the states retain a lot of power still.
One of these powers is the right to regulate and license engineers and they do so in some states that are extremely parochial and even protectionist. I'm licensed in 20 states so I don't have a beef with this other than to say that this off-shoring practice isn't ALL about competition, but has a straight-up legal aspect as well.
Many states say you cannot legally DO engineering in their state unless you are licensed. And you cannot DO engineering by having others DO it for you in some remote location and then sign off on it.
This is really no different than any other law in any other country that limits professional practices in any way from outsiders. Its also somewhat like a soft-tariff in that it limits competitiveness through legal means to guard the local turf.
From my perspective, I don't usually go for most laws that limit open competition. Competition adds to the quality and value of the workforce and industry. But I also see problems with some engineer in a different country not understanding local code requirements, loads, construction practices, etc. that would cause the client problems unless the EOR who eventually signs off on it pays close attention, supervises the work, and ensures the public safety and welfare as any good engineer should.
just my 2 (ok 22) cents.
RE: Remote Engineering
h
My concern is that sooner or later as engineering pays less and less there won't be any engineers. I believe were going to need engineers to drive vigerous economies.
When all we have left is hair dressers and telephone sanatizers we better make usre we have a few peoplw who can make hand baskets.
RE: Remote Engineering
IT'S A GOOD THING!!!
TTFN
RE: Remote Engineering
Wes C.
------------------------------
No trees were killed in the sending of this message, but a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
Well, that's one way of looking at it. Those of us who build missiles rather than targets would probably say that the job was poorly specified in the first place. The lax attitude towards design is shown by the necessity for such argy-bargy.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
RE: Remote Engineering
When you trouble yourself to remove the dirt from the holes, you find that there's rock where you expected dirt, mud where you expected rock, and quicksand where you expected mere mud.
The excavation and the revelations all occur _after_ the plans are, uh, cast in concrete, and after the money has been allocated. Hence the RFIs and other argy-bargy. It ain't like workin' for the DOD.
Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
Hate to burst your bubble, but just because a spec is DoD, makes it neither bullet-proof nor unambiguous.
Case in point: we just figured out today, after a solid 3 years on contract, how one performance parameter was interpreted differently by us and our supplier.
TTFN
RE: Remote Engineering
I'll change my mind on that, when every one of you can say that ALL the people that have worked on projects with you have seen the site. This includes the draftsman, and the EIT doing the initial work, stuck in his /her cubicle. Now, add to that the understanding of the codes. Based on the questions presented on this site about interpreting portions of codes, there are obviously differing opinions on some things. There is always a learning cure, whether it is the new grad, working with the code for the first time, or the ready to retire engineer that needs to brush up on changes in the new revisions or code (such as the recent switch for many to the IBC, LRFD design, etc.).
Now for “direct supervision”. Do those of you complaining of this really sit and watch a draftsman draw every line, an EIT perform every calculation, and fix any errors observed in real time as they occur? I bet it is more along the line of “Hey you, figure this out. I want it to do this.” Then you check it afterwards, perhaps with some questions during the process.
If you find the local company is not following the license requirements or practicing quality engineering, hang them high with the local law. They can try to go after their off-site subcontractor/employees if they want.
RE: Remote Engineering
Yes, I check every line of those who draw for me. Do I make mistakes? Yes, everyone does. But that's not the point.
The issue is that the law states that the engineering should be done by a licensed engineer in that state/region/whatever.
I have no problem with a person from a non-US country WHO IS LICENSED in the US to perform the engineering.
Its the people who hire engineers from out of the country, who don't supervise the designs, who don't do the calculations or supervise those who do, and then use their US license to seal the plans - stating untruthfully that they have designed the project and are protecting the welfare and safety of the public.
I'm not ticked at the non-US engineers doing the work...I'm ticked at the US engineer who is essentially plan stamping drawings.
RE: Remote Engineering
I think your wording is backwards (at least based on the states I am licensed in) in that the engineer must be licensed in the state. You indicate the licensed engineer must be located in the state, which is not correct.
Never said you did, but the comments in the post generally indicate that if a person is in that it can not conceivably be legit.
Exactly my point. But what if that engineer takes the same care as you (or even better) when doing his/her review? The OP asked about the business model, not the bad engineer.
RE: Remote Engineering
Your first quote response above - yes I check my staff's work, but I ALSO have direct and personal input and decision making in how the structure gets built in the first place.
This is where the typical licening law makes a very VERY important distinction. The practice of engineering involves decision making. It involves process, coordination, and an intimacy with the project.
While a complete design review of another engineer's design can be considered the practice of engineering, a review like that must include a comprehensive design/calculation effort to allow that reviewing engineer to then serve as engineer of record.
The state laws that prohibit plan stamping are there because the engineering boards correctly perceive that too many cases would occur where someone will "review" a design and stamp it without fully digging into the design and understanding it.
An engineer who does not supervise the original design effort, does not decide how things are framed, where the load paths go, and how connections are to be facilitated, does not have the same knowledge, care or control of an engineer who participates in the design as it happens.
I agree with your other two quotes of mine - backward statement by me and all.
But your last statement:
If the reviewing engineer takes the same care or better in DESIGNING the project, I have no problem. But the fear is that many engineers who "plan stamp" won't do a COMPLETE design. The human tendancy is to check something only to a certain extent...and that is what the plan stamping laws are out to prohibit.
RE: Remote Engineering
Canadians can compete and win lots of US federal jobs and no one seems offended, although it is our tax dollars being spent.
Somhow we can't take it when work is performed in India or China, I do resent it, but hey it is all fair game, we have signed WTO, NAFTA and all kinds of agreements, we have to live with them.
As for the ethics part, I can't tell you all the number of Electrical Engineers stamping Mechanical drawings every day, and vise versa in every state. Some of you probably did.
I'd rather see a Mechanical Engineer stamping Mechanical Drawings done in India than an Electrical Engineer signing Mechanical drwings done in Virginia or anywhere else.
Atlas
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
Something that is invariably the case, but not often stated clearly in state engineering laws, is that if a structure or project of some kind is located in a state, then doing engineering work on that structure constitutes engineering in that state, even if the engineer in question never actually sets foot in that state.
The company in question could simply attempt to carry on a normal civil or structural practice in the US. However, they aren't doing that, according to the website. They are trying to partner with US consulting firms. This does raise the issue of exactly who is in responsible charge of the work being done, and who stamps it (does that one licensed individual personally resume responsibility for everything they do?). Their website names an individual and states "He is now the Supervisor of Engineering Operations and is responsible for the production of engineering plans for land development projects in the United States." This is NOT the individual listed with the license. It appears from their website that they expect to do unlicensed work which will be directly supervised by an unlicensed individual and then be stamped by the "partner" company, thus making more money for the partner company. They never come out and state this for obvious reasons.
The whole issue of outsourcing is kind of a mess. The principle idea is that my company will outsource, yours will not, and I will then have an economic edge over you, enabling me to make more money. The problem with the line of reasoning is that if every competitor outsources, you no longer have an economic edge over anyone- and instead of actually doing constructive work with your company, you've become just a brokerage firm for having it done by others. In the case of the company above, if they get going good, they could simply hire a few engineers in the US to represent them here, and their partner firms would then be superfluous.
It would be interesting to see the reactions if this plan is applied to medicine.
It would also be interesting to see how this would affect liability insurance for the companies involved.
EddyC- I think your statement would more correctly say "There's not an obvious violation of the law", which is a bit different. Having a PE onstaff is not an automatic guarantee of compliance with all engineering laws.
RE: Remote Engineering
I am in agreement with your entire statement above. If the states allow the business practice described above, PEs might over time end up being nothing more than "rubber stampers" of overseas work. At such a point, there will no longer be any purpose to engineering licensure and we will professionally end up back in the 19th century. All so someone can gain a temporary edge over their competitors.
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
The salary level for equally qualified engineers was 1/4 the American wage rate but this put the India employee in a comparative great position, (affording servants, vacation homes and private schools for the children).
Price and competitive pressure requires this low cost engineering for mega projects offered by the multi-national corporations, (ExxonMobil, BP, etc.).
RE: Remote Engineering
"Engaging in the practice of professional engineering as an employee under a licensed professional engineer, engaging in the practice of architecture as an employee under a licensed architect, or engaging in the practice of land surveying as an employee under a licensed land surveyor; provided, that such practice shall not include responsible charge of design or supervision."
Having the PE "on board" is not enough, he must be supervising the project and be in "responsible charge." You may debate exactly that means, but it certainly means more than plan stamping. I see no reason why supervision and responsible charge cannot take place remotely via modern communications. See FAQ #5 on their website. You would probably need actual evidence of wrong doing to take to the board.
RE: Remote Engineering
Somehow for projects on that level it's not "outsourcing".
Hg
Eng-Tips policies: FAQ731-376
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
RE: Remote Engineering
Hg
Eng-Tips policies: FAQ731-376