In recent years I have noticed or felt that the meaning of ENGINEER has been taken very lightly. In our times to be an engineer was a tough task with very sound foundation of knowledge of mathematics and science and had very good talent. Not every body had good command of these subjects and so Engineers became only those who were very very genious people. But now a days every subject was coined the name of engineering be it management or something else.So i think the weight of the term engineer has been reduced considerably in recent years. Do you agree with this view?
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
About change in thinking who are called engineers 10
- Thread starter 19652022
- Start date
Slugger926
Bioengineer
You should come south to Oklahoma and get your PE. Once you have it, you can transfer it to Kansas and Missouri. YOu can't call yourself an engineer there until you have transferred it. Texas is the same way.
I had a friend who transfered from Oklahoma to Texas. He had his PE here in Oklahoma, but put P.E. on his new business cards in Texas before he had a chance to transfer it. He had to pay a fine in Texas because someone turned him before he got his license in Texas.
I had a friend who transfered from Oklahoma to Texas. He had his PE here in Oklahoma, but put P.E. on his new business cards in Texas before he had a chance to transfer it. He had to pay a fine in Texas because someone turned him before he got his license in Texas.
GregLocock
Automotive
I checked with the Texas board and their eligibility-o-meter said I could go for a PE on the basis of experience, so long as I passed the two exams.
So that option is still available. I didn't check exactly how many years of experience were required, I guess 22 covers most things!
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
So that option is still available. I didn't check exactly how many years of experience were required, I guess 22 covers most things!
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
- Thread starter
- #23
It is the opinion of adminstrators and beaurocrats who usually do not want to recognize the role of engineers and try to misinterprete the term engineer with ranking several nonilligible professions as equavalent to engineer(like in south asian countries).
Slugger926
Bioengineer
Greg - I believe Oklahoma is 4 years experience with an accredited Engineering degree, 6 years experience for a non-accredited engineering degree, 8 years experience for a math or science degree, and 15 years experience with no degree or non-related degree.
The EIT test will be tough without the classwork ahead of time. Also the PE exam may be touch or extremely tough depending on the Disicipline you take it in. The Agricultural/Biosystems PE exam is impossible to study for unless you take classes from multiple univerisities that have different specialty areas (chicken farms at University Arkansas vs Environmental, Machine Design and Grain Storage at Oklahoma State and Texas A&M).
The EIT test will be tough without the classwork ahead of time. Also the PE exam may be touch or extremely tough depending on the Disicipline you take it in. The Agricultural/Biosystems PE exam is impossible to study for unless you take classes from multiple univerisities that have different specialty areas (chicken farms at University Arkansas vs Environmental, Machine Design and Grain Storage at Oklahoma State and Texas A&M).
GregLocock
Automotive
Oh I wasn't serious about it, I just saw the on line calculator so filled it in to see what it said.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
Greg that simply is not true. The word engineer has a different meaning in the UK to the US. Maybe you should get your “facts” right.
That does not mean that a heating engineer who is trained in fitting household heating systems can go out and design a power station, but he is none the less an engineer by the UK definition.
If I hack my way around a golf course am I a golfer or do I need a PGA card to be so?
That does not mean that a heating engineer who is trained in fitting household heating systems can go out and design a power station, but he is none the less an engineer by the UK definition.
If I hack my way around a golf course am I a golfer or do I need a PGA card to be so?
GregLocock
Automotive
What isn't true? I am fairly well aware of the situation in the UK, having, you know, been born there, grown up there, went to uni there, and worked as an engineer there for 7 years, and I'm still an associate member of the IMechE.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
Cheers
Greg Locock
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
-
2
- #28
A cub scout once asked me "what is an engineer?" How do you answer that question to an 8-year old? My answer was "someone who uses arithmetic to describe and predict the results of modifications to the world we live in". I'm not sure all of the the 8-year olds in the Pack got it, but some did (and two are currently in engineering school).
A "sanitary engineer" doesn't fit that "definition". When I was a mechanical operator in a Navy Nuc Plant my job (with a high school education and 6-months of class room work in Nuc School) largely fit that "definition".
This thread has turned into yet another "to PE or not to PE" thread. The only reason that I can see governments getting involved is their explicit responsibility to protect the public. They have regulations to describe who can "hold themselves out to the public as an engineer", and they try to satisfy those regulations by defining the requirements in their jurisdiction to hold yourself out to be an engineer. If another law requires a bridge design to be stamped by an engineer, I for one appreciate that the law clearly controls who can own a stamp.
Reading the original post it looks to me like the question isn't about PE's (or the local equivilent), it is about the errosion of the stature of term "engineer" by management using the title in lieu of pay.
I had a friend who did a job for the phone company that used to be called "Lineman" and in one of their monthly re-organizations his job title got changed to "Engineer, First Class". When people asked him what he did he said "I'm an engineer with the phone company". Often enough, his response elicited the question "Oh, where did you go to school?". Every time I saw this exchange it was followed by an embarassed "Littleton High School" and a change of subject.
Just like economic inflation, no one benefits from "title inflation".
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
The harder I work, the luckier I seem
A "sanitary engineer" doesn't fit that "definition". When I was a mechanical operator in a Navy Nuc Plant my job (with a high school education and 6-months of class room work in Nuc School) largely fit that "definition".
This thread has turned into yet another "to PE or not to PE" thread. The only reason that I can see governments getting involved is their explicit responsibility to protect the public. They have regulations to describe who can "hold themselves out to the public as an engineer", and they try to satisfy those regulations by defining the requirements in their jurisdiction to hold yourself out to be an engineer. If another law requires a bridge design to be stamped by an engineer, I for one appreciate that the law clearly controls who can own a stamp.
Reading the original post it looks to me like the question isn't about PE's (or the local equivilent), it is about the errosion of the stature of term "engineer" by management using the title in lieu of pay.
I had a friend who did a job for the phone company that used to be called "Lineman" and in one of their monthly re-organizations his job title got changed to "Engineer, First Class". When people asked him what he did he said "I'm an engineer with the phone company". Often enough, his response elicited the question "Oh, where did you go to school?". Every time I saw this exchange it was followed by an embarassed "Littleton High School" and a change of subject.
Just like economic inflation, no one benefits from "title inflation".
David Simpson, PE
MuleShoe Engineering
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.
The harder I work, the luckier I seem
To the question “I thought in the UK when you hear the title engineer the first person that they would think of would be a TV repairman or garage mechanic?” your reply was “No, that is an alarmist viewpoint spread about by those with an agenda.”
That is what is not true, that is exactly what most people view engineers as in the UK as that is what the vast majority of engineers are. The very definition of an engineer in the UK has nothing to do with having a formal qualification, although obviously some do.
However to undertake certain tasks you have to have certain qualifications, but I guess you already knew that.
That is what is not true, that is exactly what most people view engineers as in the UK as that is what the vast majority of engineers are. The very definition of an engineer in the UK has nothing to do with having a formal qualification, although obviously some do.
However to undertake certain tasks you have to have certain qualifications, but I guess you already knew that.
-
1
- #30
bigTomHanks
Mechanical
>>I had a friend who did a job for the phone company that used to be called "Lineman" and in one of their monthly re-organizations his job title got changed to "Engineer, First Class". When people asked him what he did he said "I'm an engineer with the phone company". Often enough, his response elicited the question "Oh, where did you go to school?". Every time I saw this exchange it was followed by an embarassed "Littleton High School" and a change of subject.<<
Very good point. I have seen this on many occasions and nobody wins here. Its always sad to see someone who has a title but none of the responsibility/pay that is supposed to go with that title. If managers or companies think that this REALLY works for the majority of the public then they are very confused. I personally think it is demoralizing, only leads to resentment, and status anxiety for the person. What surprises me is that the U.S. military who happens to be the origin of engineering in the U.S. (West Point Military Acadamey) is one of the organizations that does this the most. Please don't take this as a knock to the military.
Very good point. I have seen this on many occasions and nobody wins here. Its always sad to see someone who has a title but none of the responsibility/pay that is supposed to go with that title. If managers or companies think that this REALLY works for the majority of the public then they are very confused. I personally think it is demoralizing, only leads to resentment, and status anxiety for the person. What surprises me is that the U.S. military who happens to be the origin of engineering in the U.S. (West Point Military Acadamey) is one of the organizations that does this the most. Please don't take this as a knock to the military.
Bill and Slugger
What you say is true about earning your PE by experience is true, there is some more info you need to know.
I started school in the early 70’s and took about two years of classes. I then went to work surveying, which led to construction engineering. I earned an RLS and went to work at a water utility district, in the engineering department. I ran into a glass ceiling; pay wise, I could not go pass it with out a PE. I applied in my home state but could not take the EIT much less the PE w/o an ABET degree. I applied in another state that would allow PE by experience. Passed the EIT and take the PE in Oct. The kicker is I can not practice in my home state w/o the degree even with the PE from the second state. Be sure to double check the states you want to practice in about transferring an ‘experience’ PE to that state. To practice in my home state I have been going back to school to earn my ABET engineering degree. I lack about 2 semesters to finish before I can practice here.
What you say is true about earning your PE by experience is true, there is some more info you need to know.
I started school in the early 70’s and took about two years of classes. I then went to work surveying, which led to construction engineering. I earned an RLS and went to work at a water utility district, in the engineering department. I ran into a glass ceiling; pay wise, I could not go pass it with out a PE. I applied in my home state but could not take the EIT much less the PE w/o an ABET degree. I applied in another state that would allow PE by experience. Passed the EIT and take the PE in Oct. The kicker is I can not practice in my home state w/o the degree even with the PE from the second state. Be sure to double check the states you want to practice in about transferring an ‘experience’ PE to that state. To practice in my home state I have been going back to school to earn my ABET engineering degree. I lack about 2 semesters to finish before I can practice here.
Kind of related to this thread…
I’m confused about National Society of Professional Engineers stance of the engineering title or who can call them selves an engineer in this article “Engineers' Image Differs Across the Globe” ( Apart from the daunting issue of fewer engineers graduating in the US, but the article carries on that the kids that are graduating are Engineers, including the kids that are graduating from the other countries.
Maybe I am reading this wrong, but I am coming away with the idea that in order to be an engineer, you have to graduate with an engineering degree. There is nothing mentioning about the PE requirement.
Go Mechanical Engineering
Tobalcane
I’m confused about National Society of Professional Engineers stance of the engineering title or who can call them selves an engineer in this article “Engineers' Image Differs Across the Globe” ( Apart from the daunting issue of fewer engineers graduating in the US, but the article carries on that the kids that are graduating are Engineers, including the kids that are graduating from the other countries.
Maybe I am reading this wrong, but I am coming away with the idea that in order to be an engineer, you have to graduate with an engineering degree. There is nothing mentioning about the PE requirement.
Go Mechanical Engineering
Tobalcane
"engine technician" or "engineering technician" or "technical engineer" or engine technician engineer"?
In Canada it is basically if you have a degree you are professional engineer and if you don't have a degree you are an engineer. More and more companies are only hiring professional engineers. For me it is an acceptable system.
In Canada it is basically if you have a degree you are professional engineer and if you don't have a degree you are an engineer. More and more companies are only hiring professional engineers. For me it is an acceptable system.
CanuckMiner
Mechanical
QCE,
I think that you meant to say that, in Canada, if you have a LICENSE you are a professional engineer. The jurisdictions that I work in all clearly legislate that one must be licensed to use the term "professional engineer". The degree is one component of one method of obtaining the license.
Cheers,
CanuckMiner
I think that you meant to say that, in Canada, if you have a LICENSE you are a professional engineer. The jurisdictions that I work in all clearly legislate that one must be licensed to use the term "professional engineer". The degree is one component of one method of obtaining the license.
Cheers,
CanuckMiner
-
1
- #36
moltenmetal
Chemical
QCE: you've got that wrong. In Canada, anyone who uses the term "professional engineer" or any derivation thereof (i.e. even just "engineer", or "sales engineer", "project engineer" or the like) without a license to practice professional engineering, is subject to enforcement under the provincial Acts, which are the law of the land.
So here, you need a LICENSE to call yourself an engineer, period. Whether you have a degree in engineering or not is irrelevant. An engineering graduate, Canadian or otherwise, can't even call themselves an "engineer in training" unless they pay fees to the regulatory body and enroll in their EIT program. But having a business card which says "John Doe, B.A.Sc. (chemical engineering)" is not against the rules.
But you DO NOT need a license, a degree, or even a functioning cranium to get a job as an engineer, doing engineering work, in Canada! All you need is a boss dumb enough to hire you!
Huh? How does that work?
Unlike in the USA, where there is a general exemption from licensure for all engineers in "industry", in Canada there are only narrow exceptions from licensure specifically for persons working on their employer's means of production (i.e. toolmakers and millwrights making non-structural modifications to their employer's assembly line etc.). The actual exemption rules are not rigorously followed because of our proximity to the US and its GENERAL exemption from licensure, and the licensure bodies are pretty toothless on the enforcement side- though they do hang a few of the worst offenders in the Blue Pages every few months to keep people on their toes.
Companies can also obtain (i.e. are required to obtain) Certificates of Authorization to practice professional engineering, in which case all a firm needs is one licensed professional engineer willing to take professional responsibility for the engineering work done by the firm (i.e. a "patsy"!) and BINGO! you can hire a hundred highschool dropouts as your engineering workforce!
That's why, in a practical sense, the Canadian P.Eng. license is basically a license to do NOTHING, and more than 50% of Canadian graduates and ~ 80% of engineering immigrants to Canada practice without a license. The P.Eng. is a license to pay fees and accept career-terminating responsibility for your work, in return for NOTHING- no exclusive scope of practice, no effective enforcement against the non-licensed, and usually no more pay. I work shoulder to shoulder with non-licensed engineers and non-engineers who do the same work that I do for the same pay, but have less personal liability for the consequences of their work. It makes me scratch my head every time I write the cheque for my yearly licensure fees!
Many engineering immigrants to Canada are clamouring to get P.Eng. licenses, because they think that it's merely the lack of this license which prevents them from finding work. But in fact, the license is neither required to find work as an employee engineer, nor is it any guarantee of employment once you have one.
In fact, it's not the lack of the license, but rather the massive oversupply of engineers to Canada which is preventing them from finding work. See if you haven't seen the stats for Canada yet, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
All the P.Eng. does for these people is to demonstrate to prospective employers that someone more knowledgeable than them has reviewed this person's transcripts and work experience and determined that this person is fit to practice professional engineering- they're not some charlatan masquerading as an engineer, or some technician or technologist looking for an instant "upgrade" via immigration. Believe me, amongst the tens of thousands of brilliant, qualified and experienced (and mostly unemployed) recent immigrant engineers here in Canada, there are more than a few of this latter category spoiling things for the rest.
So here, you need a LICENSE to call yourself an engineer, period. Whether you have a degree in engineering or not is irrelevant. An engineering graduate, Canadian or otherwise, can't even call themselves an "engineer in training" unless they pay fees to the regulatory body and enroll in their EIT program. But having a business card which says "John Doe, B.A.Sc. (chemical engineering)" is not against the rules.
But you DO NOT need a license, a degree, or even a functioning cranium to get a job as an engineer, doing engineering work, in Canada! All you need is a boss dumb enough to hire you!
Huh? How does that work?
Unlike in the USA, where there is a general exemption from licensure for all engineers in "industry", in Canada there are only narrow exceptions from licensure specifically for persons working on their employer's means of production (i.e. toolmakers and millwrights making non-structural modifications to their employer's assembly line etc.). The actual exemption rules are not rigorously followed because of our proximity to the US and its GENERAL exemption from licensure, and the licensure bodies are pretty toothless on the enforcement side- though they do hang a few of the worst offenders in the Blue Pages every few months to keep people on their toes.
Companies can also obtain (i.e. are required to obtain) Certificates of Authorization to practice professional engineering, in which case all a firm needs is one licensed professional engineer willing to take professional responsibility for the engineering work done by the firm (i.e. a "patsy"!) and BINGO! you can hire a hundred highschool dropouts as your engineering workforce!
That's why, in a practical sense, the Canadian P.Eng. license is basically a license to do NOTHING, and more than 50% of Canadian graduates and ~ 80% of engineering immigrants to Canada practice without a license. The P.Eng. is a license to pay fees and accept career-terminating responsibility for your work, in return for NOTHING- no exclusive scope of practice, no effective enforcement against the non-licensed, and usually no more pay. I work shoulder to shoulder with non-licensed engineers and non-engineers who do the same work that I do for the same pay, but have less personal liability for the consequences of their work. It makes me scratch my head every time I write the cheque for my yearly licensure fees!
Many engineering immigrants to Canada are clamouring to get P.Eng. licenses, because they think that it's merely the lack of this license which prevents them from finding work. But in fact, the license is neither required to find work as an employee engineer, nor is it any guarantee of employment once you have one.
In fact, it's not the lack of the license, but rather the massive oversupply of engineers to Canada which is preventing them from finding work. See if you haven't seen the stats for Canada yet, and you'll see what I'm talking about.
All the P.Eng. does for these people is to demonstrate to prospective employers that someone more knowledgeable than them has reviewed this person's transcripts and work experience and determined that this person is fit to practice professional engineering- they're not some charlatan masquerading as an engineer, or some technician or technologist looking for an instant "upgrade" via immigration. Believe me, amongst the tens of thousands of brilliant, qualified and experienced (and mostly unemployed) recent immigrant engineers here in Canada, there are more than a few of this latter category spoiling things for the rest.
mysticpage
Mechanical
BillPSU,
Having nearly completed my BSMET, I only recently learned about the licensure process (a process sadly underemphasized in universities). I had previously thought that anyone who had an engineering degree could be an engineer (I also knew nothing of abet accredation). I found out that the MET program that I am in is accredited. I called my state board (Ohio) and asked if an engineering technology graduate could sit for the FE exam. I am allowed to sit for the exam, much to my relief, and will do so. I can also sit for the PE after 8 years of experience.
Back to the original post, I think that the title of engineer is handed out much too readily by industry, to the extent that most of the public doesn't know what an engineer actually does. (There have been SO many times I have heard this question,"So, you're going to drive trains?") The licensure process should be emphasized to a greater extent at universities.
Having nearly completed my BSMET, I only recently learned about the licensure process (a process sadly underemphasized in universities). I had previously thought that anyone who had an engineering degree could be an engineer (I also knew nothing of abet accredation). I found out that the MET program that I am in is accredited. I called my state board (Ohio) and asked if an engineering technology graduate could sit for the FE exam. I am allowed to sit for the exam, much to my relief, and will do so. I can also sit for the PE after 8 years of experience.
Back to the original post, I think that the title of engineer is handed out much too readily by industry, to the extent that most of the public doesn't know what an engineer actually does. (There have been SO many times I have heard this question,"So, you're going to drive trains?") The licensure process should be emphasized to a greater extent at universities.
In Canada things are pretty straight forward. To be called an engineer you have to be a P.Eng or a military engineer (sapper), power engineer (boiler operator) or a train engineer (driver). In these cases you have to have the appropriate membership/trades ticket and use the appropriate modifier for the term engineer.
Things have gotten a little weaker recently with the introduction of Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer. The associations have allowed the term to be used in the full designation.
IMHO this weakens the term engineer since it implies that the person is somehow ‘certified’ to be an engineer which is not the case unless the person is registered. The associations chickened out as far as I am concerned.
To achieve the P.Eng designation it takes 4 years experience as a EIT (engineer in training) one of which has to be North American experience. If you graduate from a non North American university (one not accredited by the engineering school accreditation board that covers most NA engineering schools), then the terms of an international agreement come into effect. Basically this includes the equivalent schools world wide by year, discipline and degree. If you graduated form a program on the list for your year, then you are considered academically qualified. If not then there is a long process where your credentials are examined and you may have to sit some exams.
There is of course some differences between the different provincial associations, I know of one foreign trained engineer who would have had to write several exams in one province but was accepted in another. He then was able to transfer his registration under the mobility agreement (P.Eng in good standing in one province is accepted in all other provinces with no hassle.)
As far as I am concerned to be called an engineer you should have to be a licensed registered professional.
(Before anyone gets off on me for saying that the US PE system does not apply in your industry, that is a failing of the US registration system which is unrealistic, not a failure of the desirability of universal registration of engineers.)
Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng
Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
Things have gotten a little weaker recently with the introduction of Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer. The associations have allowed the term to be used in the full designation.
IMHO this weakens the term engineer since it implies that the person is somehow ‘certified’ to be an engineer which is not the case unless the person is registered. The associations chickened out as far as I am concerned.
To achieve the P.Eng designation it takes 4 years experience as a EIT (engineer in training) one of which has to be North American experience. If you graduate from a non North American university (one not accredited by the engineering school accreditation board that covers most NA engineering schools), then the terms of an international agreement come into effect. Basically this includes the equivalent schools world wide by year, discipline and degree. If you graduated form a program on the list for your year, then you are considered academically qualified. If not then there is a long process where your credentials are examined and you may have to sit some exams.
There is of course some differences between the different provincial associations, I know of one foreign trained engineer who would have had to write several exams in one province but was accepted in another. He then was able to transfer his registration under the mobility agreement (P.Eng in good standing in one province is accepted in all other provinces with no hassle.)
As far as I am concerned to be called an engineer you should have to be a licensed registered professional.
(Before anyone gets off on me for saying that the US PE system does not apply in your industry, that is a failing of the US registration system which is unrealistic, not a failure of the desirability of universal registration of engineers.)
Rick Kitson MBA P.Eng
Construction Project Management
From conception to completion
Well moltenmetal this was also my thinking. I read the entire BC act and could not find the restriction of the title engineer anywhere. It only states that the title professional engineer is prohibited. I assume that is why so many people without licensure are using the title in Canada. If you state you are a PEng you will get slappped if you are not a PEng but I'm not sure about the engineering title. Please prove me wrong. and tell me why so many people use the engineering title in Canada with out any association in the provincal association.
"As far as I am concerned to be called an engineer you should have to be a licensed registered professional."
I wish it were the case but maybe that is only be because it would benefit me.
"As far as I am concerned to be called an engineer you should have to be a licensed registered professional."
I wish it were the case but maybe that is only be because it would benefit me.
I work in the USA and I have worked for 3 consultants (non-exempt side of engineering). The majority of the design staff in these companies were unlicensed, yet did engineering, had engineer titles and were marketed as engineers. So I don't see much difference between the Consulting side of engineering and Industry in regards to who does the majority of engineering (the unlicensed).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- News
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question