Pete,
Perhaps a little selfishness is what this profession needs. In my experience companies tend to see engineers as interchangeable cogs. Any fifty are just as good as any other fifty, so lets hire the cheapest ones we can find. Its funny, but this logic doesn't appear to apply to CEOs. Lets remember that the Industrial Exemption was not created for the benefit of engineers working in industry, it was created for the benefit of industry.
In my opinion, the greatest threat to the economic competitiveness of US industry is not higher wages for engineers, but, the drain on the engineering talent pool which the current situation is causing. For better or worse, we are in a global economy, and it seems to me that we have two choices. We can lower our standard of living to compete with third world labor, or we can strive to create a profession which attracts the "best and brightest". People whose technical skill and creative input add value far in excess of their compensation. Personally, I vote for the latter.
My point in bringing up the "original engineers" was not intended to imply that references from practicing PE's familiar with ones work are not valuable. I believe that they serve an important function. I have provided references for several people who worked under my direct supervision, and have always considered it a serious responsibility. The point that I'm trying to make is that the Industrial Exemption has created a "chicken and egg" situation where few engineers working in industry are registered, and most cannot be registered because, few engineers working in industry are registered. If we are ever going achieve true professionalism, which in my opinion requires universal registration, then we need to find a way around this situation.
![[smile]](/data/assets/smilies/smile.gif "[smile] [smile]")
