Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
(OP)
Hi All, I lived and studied in a country which follows the USA in terms of regulating the practice of engineering (Civil), that is PE license is given by a government authority which requires you to gain an x amount of experience then sit and pass the PE exam (plus an interview, in some instances).
However, I have been traveling and working in other countries that has a regulatory frame work similar to those of the UK. That is, submission of experience and qualification would suffice (plus an interview if required) to gain registration. Also, there are things called "Chartered Engineer" Status, which is a recognition of your professionalism, however this is not mandatory (more to do with selling your self) but this things are regulated by private organizations such as Istructe
Now, my question is why the USA & UK have a very big difference in the regulation of engineering (more particularly civil/structural)? Which one would be a better system in terms of regulating the profession?
However, I have been traveling and working in other countries that has a regulatory frame work similar to those of the UK. That is, submission of experience and qualification would suffice (plus an interview if required) to gain registration. Also, there are things called "Chartered Engineer" Status, which is a recognition of your professionalism, however this is not mandatory (more to do with selling your self) but this things are regulated by private organizations such as Istructe
Now, my question is why the USA & UK have a very big difference in the regulation of engineering (more particularly civil/structural)? Which one would be a better system in terms of regulating the profession?






RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
Cheers
Greg Locock
New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
https://www.engc.org.uk/
The likes of IStructE, ICE, CIHT, etc. are the various industry specific bodies through which you can gain professional registration.
https://www.engc.org.uk/professional-registration/
https://www.engc.org.uk/about-us/our-partners/prof...
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
A lot of the engineering systems are based on the assumption that all engineers do the same thing, and if you don't fit into that system, it doesn't work as well. In my case, in order to show I was qualified to design tanks, I had to take a test about sizing pumps. Makes no sense. So the testing sounds good on paper, not quite as great in practice.
But, when I first got my license, in 1990, my state didn't require the tests, so I didn't take them. Then several years later, to get licensed in a different state, I had to take them.
States have also varied in the degree to which they will accept experience in lieu of education.
Perhaps worth pointing out that the educational systems of the different countries vary also.
I don't know how the UK works their engineering regulation. I know when I was in college, I would read the UK mechanical engineering magazine. I got the impression that mechanical engineering there overlapped the "being a mechanic" field a good bit, so I'm not sure what distinctions they had between the two. Anyway, the definition of "engineering" seemed to be somewhat different there.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
In the US, Licensing is typically as follows (with exceptions):
- Obtain an engineering degree at an accredited university
- Pass an 8 hour Engineer-in-Training Exam given by a national private testing organization (NCEES)
- Acquire 3 to 5 years (state dependent) of specified engineering experience that is attested to by previously licensed engineers
- Pass another 8 hour exam to receive the title Professional Engineer for the State you applied. If you want a license for another state, you have the above documented and submitted plus maybe another short test that is state specific (or not).
Licensing, to my knowledge, is mostly limited to and required in construction. Outside of construction it is not required and tends to be seen as an unnecessary liability risk.
Read through the UK Spec and still having a hard time understanding what is actually required. For instance, if a company wants to hook you up with all of the right experience and job exposure, it seems like you could be a chartered engineer within a year out of college? What am I missing? What becomes available at the different levels?
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
We also have the P.Eng from the Society of Professional Engineers but that isn't recognised by the engineering council; fine if you'd like to work in Europe for the most part though.
Non of this is a legal requirement to be a practising engineer. Membership of the institutions is completely optional although a lot of the bigger companies will insist on it. It only becomes a legal issue if you're claiming to be incorporated or chartered or even engineering technician level, and you're not or if someone is making claims to qualifications they don't hold.
If you want to know if you're status or even qualifications are acceptable, you really need to check with that country's governing body(ies). Equivalence is a bit of a dark hole.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
I do agree with the statements put up by Teguci & Tempeng. Regulation in the USA is more straightforward compared in the UK (or should I say Europe in general) where there are alot of "titles" that can be assessed for that isn't necessarily required if an Engineer will signing off drawings (More specifically for civil/structural). Please do correct me if I'm wrong on this.
In short, the USA have a more rigorous exam based system, while the UK have a more reporting/documentation based system. But why the stark contrast? Appreciate a reply from someone practicing in the EU.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
I think it would take something catastrophic to happen (in the UK at least) before the government or local authorities would start regularising engineering practise. Like some sort of country wide gross incompetency issue.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
I think the UK approach relies very much upon honesty, especially in relation to technical ability. You have to demonstrate you meet the Engineering Council requirement but no one will check your design work line by line. The verification is done through mentoring during your career and through reports and interviews at the final review. This approach allows Engineers whose experience is not design related to get Chartered also, but will seem weak to those who believe it must be a technical challenge.
The US method of sitting exams seems more akin to your university experience. I think the downside is that this tests knowledge in a very narrow manner. We used to review past papers to question spot. It gave you a good chance of passing but you only learnt what you needed to pass.
The UK IStructE uses an exam. If you have experience which is an exact fit to the question then you have a good chance of passing, if not, then you are stuffed. That doesn't make you a bad engineer, it just means you can't pass the test.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_and_licen...
Noting the "In general there is no restriction on the right to practice as an engineer in the UK" clause, does this mean that anyone can put a building design together and have it built? How do the UK jurisdictions safeguard the public welfare when it comes to construction?
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
I suppose you can get people who break the law and please themselves, but that would be no different in the US. In general that responsibility falls to Building Control. Who are a function of local government (local councils). Before you erect a building you must apply to Building Control for a Building Warrant. Building Control then check that your design meets the requirements of the Building Regulations in respect of strength, fire, service etc etc. The requirements are freely available in the Building Regulations. This can be time consuming because BC need to check the calculations.
In Scotland they have a slightly different approach. Engineers register with Structural Engineers Registration (SER), during which process they are vetted. If they pass then they will be allowed to 'Self Certify', provided they can prove to Building Control that the design has been checked by someone competent. It is supposed to make the process quicker.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
In the UK, who takes responsibility for the design of a building that has received a "Full Plans" approval from the Building Control? If something is wrong with the approved design, do public servants get fined, fired or even go to jail?
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
This discussion appears to be veering off the OP's original query.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
Employer assesses you generally by job interview, tests and your portfolio. If you do something wrong you simply will be fired or in case something breaks even appear before a tribunal (but of course it happens very very rare, I even hardly can remember any cases). Generally top managers of project company bear all responsibility for possible damage (because they haven't find competent engineer for their task). But of course it doesn't mean that engineers lie down on their job. Because if client wants he will sue you as well.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
The OP asked - "why the USA & UK have a very big difference in the regulation of engineering (more particularly civil/structural)? Which one would be a better system in terms of regulating the profession?"
To me, this liability issue is at the heart of the difference. In the US, we as professional engineers, legally take personal liability for designs when we stamp and seal the drawings. If there is something deficient with the design that causes harm to the public, it is on us. We, as individuals, have the full authority and responsibility for the design. If we sign and seal a drawing that includes other peoples' work, we not only take personal liability for that work but also are being legally unethical if that work was not performed under our direction and within our expertise. Unethical conduct by a PE is subject to personal fines, license revocation and reprimands.
As I understand it, in the UK, the company holds the authority and responsibility for the design. There is no named individual on the drawing (?)
As for which one is better, (assuming my interpretation is correct), I'm leaning towards the UK model. But I'd like to know more.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model
Not quite. The designer and the checker both have to sign and date the drawings and calcs. The checking engineer is usually of chartered status and takes overall responsibility for the design team. The technical director also has a look over and adds his/her signature to the stack, which gets it covered by company insurance. So although it's the company that pays out via insurance, you can bet your dangley bits that it'll be the principle engineer that cops it should the excrement hit the bladed air circulator should it be proven that there's a design fault.
It can appear at first glance that personal responsibility isn't an issue but nothing ever works that way.
RE: Engineering Regulation UK vs USA Model