Extremely Low Engineering Fees 16

[tdevries37]

What is the average structural engineering fee out there? I am getting quite frustrated in quoting projects & getting beat out by firms that claim to draw the structural drawings and seal them for $50 to $100, for something like a 24 x 40 pole barn for example. That's it, $50 - $100 total.
How can legit firms compete against that? We are located in Michigan and there is no way we can complete a project for that fee.

Any feedback is appreciated. Thanks!

 

[frv]

I don't disagree that one needs to adapt to changing business environments.

Nor do I disagree that there are very talented individuals in other countries. In fact, if one were to look at the quality of education in some other countries, an argument could be made that these countries are producing better engineers, on average, than we are.

With what I do take exception, is taking on liability for a "quick buck" and undermining the profession locally.

Local engineers know what methods of construction are cost-effective; they know what materials are locally available; they know what common conditions to watch for; they can make site visits to correct problems that WILL arise.

This knowledge is an added value to the pure engineering services. When an engineer agrees to stamp drawings for nickel they undermine this added value and further the commoditization of our profession.

I'm not trying to get into a discussion of the virtues and pitfalls of laissez-faire capitalism. But undermining local engineers and the engineering profession in general for a quick buck is, in MY opinion, myopic.

 

[tdevries37]

frv - Very well put, thank you

 

[strucguy]

Make path of getting licensure more comprehensive so that not every tom, dick and harry get's it so easily. We need responsible professionals who value and care for quality work to be the front runners in offering design services. I personally know a lot of less competent engineers who give PE exam in civil to become licensed engineers, 'cos they couldn't clear PE structural-1 even after multiple attempts. I am not saying not everyone who takes the easier route does unethical practices, and I don't mean to offend anyone by my comments. But, atleast by having comprehensive selection criteria in place, we can have competent people deliver quality services at fair price and that way uphold the value of the profession we are in.

 

[frv]

strucguy-

I think we are moving in that direction. It starts with the new SE exam next year. We still need to address the issue at the state level and have all states enact some sort of Title Act to ensure ONLY engineers licensed in structural practice structural.

I'm sure I'll catch some heat for the the following assertion, but structural engineering is different than other branches of engineering. Our responsibility for the safety and welfare of the public is more direct than in other branches.

I DO think we should be held up to a higher standard. I also know of practicing structural engineers who were unable to pass the soon-to-be-defunct SE1 on multiple occasions, so they took the civil and passed.

Whatever you think of this on an ethical level, it is perfectly legal for these individuals to practice structural engineering. If we want our profession to be held to a higher standard, we should lobby at the state level to enact Title Acts. Otherwise I'll we'll get to do is gripe and moan on internet forums.

 

[rbulsara]

Just playing devil's advocate! Trust me, I am no way condoning low balling, but it is not illegal, yet!

I would think that the cheap engineer who stamps the drawing for $100 is already licensed!

Process of issuing PE licensing has nothing to do with cheap competition or someone deciding to make unethical use of his/her privileges. In fact, being smart and knowledgeable has nothing to do with being ethical. Just look at Wall Street and those CEOs who got paid millions in bonuses to take our economy to cleaners!! If the economy were doing better, we would not be discussing this issue.

I do not believe that a few cheapscates charging $100 for a stamp are bringing down the profession or economy. In fact, why compete with them? Plus unless you can prove their design was flawed, low pricing is not a crime, but it is a shame!

Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[321GO]

(cheap) competition is nothing new, businesses where/are faced with this all the time (wether we like it or not) IMHO.

What "normally" happens is that businesses survive by getting more competetive with regard to the competetion, often increasing their efficiency and skill levels. This was the case in the past, as i believe is the case now.

I think in such situations, it is more wise to reassess the business model, than to "defend the castle" with ever increasing effort.






"If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack."
Winston Churchill

 

[GregLocock]

Suppose I invent a CAD plotter that takes my verbal instructions, and repsonds by issuing a set of plans.

I have done the engineering, and reviewed the plans, and can then seal them.

However further examination reveals that the voice activated CAD plotter is nothing more than a telephone and a modem line and a plotter, and somehwere on the other end of the wires there is a normal human CAD guy drafting away.

Many of you appear to think that the existence of, and location of, the CAD guy somehow affects the integrity of the process. How quaint.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[frv]

Greg-

I don't think anyone is arguing about CAD. CAD outsourcing, especially for repetitive stuff, is not uncommon.

Engineering, on the other hand (and here I'm referring to structural engineering specifically), requires a minimum of knowledge of local conditions, practices and regulations. Engineers require access to job sites and the ability to communicate during normal business hours with the design team.

321GO-

I think you are insinuating that my position is somehow protectionist. I don't think it's any more protectionist than what is required of doctors or lawyers.

I've read many posts on these very forums complaining about the fact that although many engineers have education rivaling that of some physicians and lawyers, and often times we are responsible for the lives of many more people at any given time than them, our profession isn't remunerated on the same level as theirs.

One way to bring our profession on par with medicine and law (from a compensation standpoint, of course- ethically we tend to outclass at least one of these )is to willingly accept higher standards for practicing. We already have something like residency (4 years without being able to sit for the exam), we will soon be required to have additional education beyond an undergraduate degree (there is a proposal to require the equivalent of a masters program for structural), and beginning next year we will have a much more rigorous examination process. I am completely in favor of these steps and I don't think these are "protectionist" (at least in the sense of protecting MY job.. perhaps it's protectionist in the sense of protecting the profession).

 

[rbulsara]

Come to terms with outsourced engineering! This very website is an example of it, if one can get "free" advice from anyone in the world, why can't one get "paid" advice and analysis?

I think importance of sealing and stamping is being exaggerated here. However important it is, it is merely a statutory requirement.

To that end, as long as the professional of record takes responsibility of reviewing and approving the design, it does not matter who helped him accomplish his task. Not all engineering works require "personal" knowledge of the site. Someone qualified can collect the data, which can be analyzed and used by someone qualified who never set a foot in the field. Structural modeling and analysis comes to mind, for example.


Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[tdevries37]

frv - Exactly the point here. Outsourcing STRUCTURAL engineering outside of US borders for commercial projects located on US soil creates, in my opinion, questionable structural engineering design of these projects. I am not saying that foreign firms are incompetent at all. I would not personally structurally design a building in India, China, Japan, etc. because I am not familiar with local laws, soil conditions, loads, etc. That, to me, would be practicing engineering "outside" of my expertise, which is forbidden by most, if not all, states' engineering boards. Structural engineering needs to stay local for the public's safety.
To top it off, charging ridiculously low fees to do so (which yes I know is not a crime in and of itself) undermines the highly expected professionalism of the structural engineering profession even more.
I personally would question the quality and integrity of a structural design if I was only being charged $100 by the structural engineer. In short, you get what you pay for.

 

[frv]

rbulsara-

Signing and sealing are not mere "statutory" requirements in structural. It assigns responsibility and liability to the engineer. Our field shares one similarity with medicine in that it is almost a question of WHEN you will get sued, not WHETHER. Culpability and negligence really have little to do with it; it's just going to happen.

If a building is designed entirely overseas, how will the affected party obtain restitution? Do you think the Chinese legal system is going to allow a US company to sue a design firm because the design was delayed and it incurred additional construction costs? Or, in the case of an actual failure (admittedly, a very rare occurrence and a very small fraction of lawsuits) leading to loss of life, will the design firm in China pay for the wrongful death lawsuits? Will they even have insurance?

 

[rbulsara]

frv:

There is nothing illegal about hiring "qualified" technical help from outside your office be it next door or overseas. That help does not have to be licensed, just as not all staff engineers are licensed.

I was refraining from posting this link, but check this out as an example. They "claim" the testimonials from US customers. You cannot run away from reality. I am very well aware of responsibility of a PE and it not different from any other field and I am not belittling it.

http://www.outsource2india.com/eso/construction/structural-design.asp#hrs

Rafiq Bulsara

http://www.srengineersct.com

 

[frv]

rbulsara-

I think we're kind of going in circles here. I'm not suggesting it's in any way illegal. There are occasions where not only is it OK, but desirable to hire outside technical expertise.

Additionally, I'm not suggesting that the business model should be frozen in time. My goal, in an ideal world, would be to raise the prestige and compensation of the profession. But not just because I want to earn more money (who doesn't), but because I think our profession IS as important (and in many cases more so) than the others I have mentioned.

I think we're just kind of focusing on different things in this discussion.

And no worries, I didn't take offense at the "statutory" comment. I know other disciplines don't really understand why we structurals make such a big fuss about signing and sealing, but it does carry a lot more weight with us.

 

[321GO]

In a non-socialistic society wages are basically determined by simple supply and demand, wether we like it or not.

If wages are indeed too low, we are obviously willing to work underpaid(we like our jobs), or there is an abundance of supply.

frv,

to me it looks like you are trying to create a artificial shortage.



"If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack."
Winston Churchill

 

[frv]

Sigh..

We do not live in a socialist society. I do not desire to live in a socialist society. I am not trying to create an artificial shortage any more than physicians are creating an artificial shortage by lobbying that chiropractors or alternative medicine practitioners not be licensed in the same way they are.

What I think would be good for the profession (again, I'm ONLY referring to structural here) is to make the process of licensure reflect the level of responsibility we actually have toward the public.

Coming full circle, the OP's original post was referring to fees that most people would not even "seal a zip lock bag" for. I think if the process of licensure reflected the true responsibility we incur, no licensed professional would take this on.

On another note, we don't live in a society approaching anywhere near Adam Smith-type free market capitalism. There are many things our government requires us to do that are in the best interest of society, but not necessarily in the best interest of a particular individual.

 

[strucguy]

321G0

It's not about creating artificial shortage and raising the demand on the very few that are available. It's about quality control, we do that in all walks of life. It's about making a choice between living with the average standards and striving to raise for a better tomorrow. And, by saying that I am in no way undermining the quality of work done by each one of us. All I am trying to say is...there should be regulations in place so that all the players in the game maintain proper standard of care and assume enough liability for the services they are offering.

 

[ajack1]

I might be missing the point here, but as long as someone stays within all rules and regulations, why should you stop them charging what they want?

The thing that springs to mind for me is budget airlines, in Europe there are many but two big players. To the best of my knowledge their safety record is equal to or above that of the more prestigious carriers, but they work on much tighter margins and make much larger profits.

Personally as long as safety is not an issue I am more than happy to miss out on a free cup of coffee a packet of peanuts and a newspaper in order to save myself hundreds of pounds. Others may not agree but I like choice.

 

[BRGENG]

It only takes one engineer to offer low ball fees o bring the whole system down for everyone. You would think that other Professionals would have respect for our profession. It is amazing how the client that accepts these fees look for other engineers when it is a big project.

We simple choose to not work with clients like this on any project.

 

[GMcD]

BRGENG - yes, I agree about the low fees, but when it becomes the normal way of doing business, what then? I wish I could find the Clients who don't shop around for fees, but if we in the building services field didn't keep our fees "where the market dictates", we'd be out of work pretty soon. I guess that's what some would call a "market correction".

 

[beej67]

The first realization about free market capitalism, is that in a perfectly free market, nobody makes any money. Customers save money.

Profit only comes from exploiting areas in which the market is not free.

Hydrology, Drainage Analysis, Flood Studies, and Complex Stormwater Litigation for Atlanta and the South East -

http://www.campbellcivil.com