American Professional Societies 5

[dougantholz]

I have a question for the members here. My company recently has enacted a program where they will pay for two professional memberships for all engineers, and a half of a third membership.
My question is, here in the US, what organizations do you feel give the most benifit for membership?
Our firm deals almost exclusively in general building design, and I work mostly in steel, wood, masonry and light gauge.
Thanks for you input.

 

[Qshake]

ASCE has a tremendous package to offer in terms of knowledge based products. There are journals to subscribe to and membership benefits in technical publications. I have found this to be very rewarding. Also, there is the added benefit of the Structural Engineers Institute (SEI) which co-publishes a monthly mag with CASE and NSEA. Which provides insight to our industry from another two angles.

ACI is also a great organization with a focus on the technical facets of the concrete industry with ACI's journal.

 

[LPPE]

I would go with an AISC membership. There also may be some local/state Structural Engineer societies.

 

[eureka]

I agree with Qshake. From my own personal work environment ASCE is at the top of my list. After ASCE, depending on which material you work most with, join an organization for concrete (ACI), steel (AISC), or timber (AITC).

 

[LPPE]

I have to throw in my two cents here - I found that an ASCE membership was mostly geared toward Civil Engineers, not structural. I thought the membership dues were quite high for an organization that basically did nothing for me except send me junk mail every week on obtaining a ASCE Master Card. The monthly magazine was good, but I can't justify the yearly dues for 12 issues.

 

[Qshake]

PYKLKO,

While I don't disagree with your comment on the junk mail (there's plenty of that going around!). I would like to point out a few things...in general, I am interested in keeping abreast of new technology as well as interesting articles on old technology. To that end, ASCE has probably more than 50 journal dedicated to areas such as structural engineering, hydraulic engineering, composites, structural design in construction, transportation on and on... Moreover they have a very impressive collection of books that are pubished under the ASCE name including the Minimum Loading Criteria which is an industry staple. If the company pays for my membership and the discount on printed material is significant then it is of serious interest to me.

Of course, there are other societies that publish journals too and ACI, PCI, AISC etc are all fine organizations. But you won't find steel articles in ACI or concrete articles in AISC. You will however find both in ASCE's Journal of Structural Engineering.

If your only interest is in Civil Engineering Magazine then it is probably a waste of time.

 

[LPPE]

Structural Engineer magazine is free, so is CE News, and Modern Steel Construction. These magazines pretty much cover anything you'll see in Civil Engineering. And shouldn't your company pay for any ASCE publication you might need? Do you have to pay for AISC Third Ed LRFD yourself? If you do, I would recommend finding a new company that actually wants you to keep up with your field.

All I'm saying is that if your company is paying for memberships, I would not choose ASCE as one of them.

 

[dougantholz]

Wow, what a brew-ha-ha.
First off, since I started this discussion let me throw this out there. I am a member of ASCE, and would remain a member even if my company didn't pay for it. I am on the board of directors of my local branch of ASCE, and am quite proud of the organization. What ASCE does for me are often things that are not direclty benificial to me, but the best for my profession. For instance in Missouri a couple of years ago Landscape Architects wanted to gain licensure abilities that are the same as other Architects. ASCE fought this legislation through political influence. They said, and I agree by the way, that a Landscape Architect should be able to attain some state licensing, this licence should be different from a building architects liscence.
These are the things I am a member, and support ASCE for. They do a lot to help protect the profession.
Now my original question remains; but let me restate it a little bit.
Of the trade societies, ACI, AISC, PCI, etc; which, in the forum's collective experience, has the best bang for the free buck? Which orginization's member benifits make it an necessary part of being a professional? Which gives the best discounts, which has the best member's only magazines, which has the best member discounted seminars, etc...
You all get the drift now I hope.

 

[Rich2001]

Here is a list of societies websites, that you might want visit.



Engineering Specialty Certification

http://www.cesb.org

Council of Engineering and Scientific Specialty Boards

http://www.nafe.org

National Academy of Forensic Engineers

Engineering and Surveying Associations

http://www.enviro-engrs.org

American Academy of Environmental Engineers

http://www.aaes.org

American Association of Engineering Societies

http://www.survmap.org/

American Congress on Surveying and Mapping

http://www.acec.org

American Council of Engineering Companies

http://www.aiche.org

American Institute of Chemical Engineers

http://www.asce.org

American Society of Civil Engineers

http://www.ashrae.org

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers

http://www.asme.org/

American Society of Mechanical Engineers

http://aws.org

American Welding Society

http://www.aeecenter.org

Association of Energy Engineers

http://www.aegweb.org

Association of Engineering Geologists

http://www.afe.org

Association of Facilities Engineers

http://www.aise.org

Association of Iron and Steel Engineers

http://www.ieee.org

Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers

http://www.iienet.org

Institute of Industrial Engineers

http://www.isope.org

International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers

http://www.nabie.org

National Academy of Building Inspection Engineers

http://www.nace.org

National Association of Corrosion Engineers

http://www.naco.org/affils/nace/index.htm

National Association of County Engineers

http://www.ncees.org

National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying

http://www.ncsea.com

National Council of Structural Engineers Associations

http://www.nicet.org

National Institute for Certification in Engineering Technologies

http://www.nspe.org

National Society for Professional Engineers

http://energy.arce.ukans.edu/nsae/main.htm

National
Society of Architectural Engineers

http://www.order-of-the-engineer.org

Order of the Engineer

http://www.sae.org

Society of Automotive Engineers

http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Depts/Fire/SFPE/sfpe.html

Society of Fire Protection Engineers

http://www.sme.org

Society of Manufacturing Engineers

http://www.smenet.org

Society of Mining Engineers

http://www.sname.org

Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers

http://www.spe.org

Society of Petroleum Engineers

http://www.swe.org

Society of Women Engineers

Architecture

http://www.aiaonline.com

American
Institute of Architects

Building Regulations

http://www.ansi.org

American National Standards Institute

http://www.bocai.org

Building Officials Code Administrators International, Inc.

http://www.cabo.org

Council of American Building Officials

http://www.intlcode.org

International Code Council

http://www.icbo.org

International Conference of Building Officials

http://www.sbcci.org

Southern Building Code Congress International

Construction

http://www.asaonline.com

American Subcontractors Association

http://www.abc.org

Associated Builders and Contractors

http://www.agc.org

Associated General Contractors of America

http://www.cif.org

Construction Innovation Forum

http://www.cirt.org

Construction Industry Roundtable

http://www.csinet.org

Construction Specifications Institute

http://www.nawic.org

National Association of Women in Construction

http://www.nuca.com

National Utility Contractors Association

Education

http://www.abet.org

Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology

http://www.asee.org

American Society for Engineering Education

http://www.ascweb.org

Associated Schools of Construction

 

[Taro]

I am a member of AISC and ACI, among others. I have found these to be the two most useful trade organization memberships, though. They both provide pretty useful seminars and publication discounts. ACI journal articles are mostly venues for publishing academic research papers. Some of them are interesting and give you an idea of things to come in the future, but they rarely are immediately applicable. On the other hand, AISC's journal articles are geared much more towards practicing engineers. I regularly use design aids and technical papers from the AISC journal.

 

[JAE]

Rich 2001...pretty impressive list.. man that must have taken some time to type out.

As far as trade organizations, I would simply selectively join those that best match you focus of work. You didn't mention concrete in your original post so perhaps you bypass ACI and go on to AISC and others.

In our town, ACI has a "local" membership of about $30/yr. which covers a local newsletter and misc. costs associated with bringing in some technical speakers for 1 hour breakfast seminars. NCMA does this for masonry and CRSI provides some nice local seminars as well.

ASCE, while it is somewhat expensive, does do a lot for engineers in general. I would prefer a more central group for all engineers (much like AIA for architects, AMA for doctors, etc.) that would have more political clout. NSPE tries to do this but there are still so many engineering "societies" out there that we dilute our voice.

 

[brad]

JAE,
You mentioned NSPE--I just chose to not renew my NSPE membership. I joined largely because I agreed with their stated principles (and I still do), but I quit my membership because of (just like Pylko's ASCE experience) the only thing which I seemed to get out of it was excessive junk mail.

Also, the tone was (in my opinion) generally whiny as to why we should be certified, and I was really turned off by the lack of any social/professional opportunities within the organization that didn't revolve around either politics or shmoozing for the purposes of advancing your own company's agenda and profits.

I have previously been in ASME, and liked that organization. I am curious if you or anyone else has anything to add (maybe in defense of NSPE, or as a more suitable alternative to them).

Brad

 

[Qshake]

Bradh,

I was a member of NSPE for only a short time. I was really disappointed with the lack of communication (junk mail not withstanding!) on thier part. Also for not addressing issues/concerns/trends immediately and leveraging thier strength, which I believed to be "political savvy". As it turned out, I wasn't interested in a political organization anyway. Later I became active in ASCE.

 

[JAE]

I agree that NSPE is very political (PAC) oriented. I also joined for a time but found that I really didn't get anything out of it other than some occasional good speakers at their dinner meetings. The problem is...I really "yearn" for a total engineering organization (like the doctors and lawyers have) that represents the interests of the engineering community...this means politics which NSPE seems to relish. However, I also want the technical end of it as well. No one organization in engineering does this. They should all merge into one.

Seems I want my cake and eat it too!

 

[brad]

QSHAKE and JAE,
Now I know why I've always liked you guys!!

JAE--it is clear that your original reasons for joining NSPE were essentially identical to mine. Sadly, our reasons for quitting also seem the same.

I'll jump on my soapbox (and likely upset a few people), but here goes . . .

I believe that a partial reason why our profession has not obtained the status of the other two "major" professions (law and medical)in the US is 1) a lack of a total, focused organization coupled with 2)the lack of a "real" qualification for the profession. The closest thing to a minimum qualification is the professional engineer license; unfortunately the majority of engineering jobs do not actually require one.

Sadly, some jobs that are called "engineering" also do not require the level of skills necessary to obtain a PE. Due to this, there are plenty of "engineers" who aren't really engineers, nor are they qualified to do engineering work. I don't mind lower tech "engineering" jobs to be available for people; I just don't want their salaries blending and distorting the salaries of those who have a higher skill-set.

I am not meaning to demean those without a PE; frankly the majority of the best engineers I've known don't have one (because in my profession it is not necessary). I am meaning to target good, reasonably talented people who nonetheless do not have the technical background that engineers have. I have seen too many CAD operators with two-year degrees given the title of "engineer".

There should be a distinction within the profession, like legal assistants and physicians assistants in the other professions. (Nobody expects to pay the same for a physician's assistant as a doctor, so why should this not also apply to engineering?) Lacking this distinction, anybody can call themselves an engineer, so long as they don't advertise and they don't sign off on anything. This demeans the people who truly have a high level of technical knowledge and expertise.

I'm sure I'll get passionate from both sides on this posting; I'm looking forward to the discussion.

Brad

Addendum--to stay at least a bit on the path of the original posting--does anybody know of organizations which espouse this viewpoint? They've got my money tomorrow if they exist.

 

[Ingenuity]

Brad,

Well said, and you and I share the same thoughts. Exactly what to do about it is the hard part!

My wife stirs me by calling herself a "domestic engineer", and i get real bothered and steamed about those "sales engineer" jobs in the classifieds... but in all seriousness there does need to be a universal system of recognition of engineers...i think in Europe the post nominal "Ing" (or similar) are used by engineers and i believe their status (and salary?) is better than other regions. But post nominal are meaningless unless there is ground swell from the masses that can collectively muster the will/determination to change our ways and status.

Actually, several years ago i was enthused by the WASHINGTON ACCORD between US, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia, and a few other countries, that signed off on a cross reciprocal system for recognizing "engineers" etc. But 10 year down the track, it did nothing that i originally thought it would, or intended.

Also, engineers can be their own worse enemy....selling ourselves short when it comes to consulting rates, expert testimony rates etc etc. Lawyers, doctors, accountants do not hesitate to charge rates, that in comparison to engineering, are significantly above those of engineering. If "engineers can do for $1 what any fool can do got $2" then we ought to share in the $1 savings that we engineers bring to the table. This is part of improving our status.


Maybe we have to start on the next generation on "engineers"...In Australia (where I am from) we have the Institution of Engineers, Australia, and several years ago i got involved with the "Neighborhood Engineer Program" whereby individual practicing engineers went around to high schools and spoke with students about engineering...it worked well...maybe this is a method that can be improved upon for the future.

I look forward to other thoughts on this topic...

My 4 cents worth ...i just doubled my rates!