Professional Engineers Ontario: Removal of Industrial Exception 2

[drawoh]

GregLocock,

According to a link at the bottom of the page, the PEO is pissed off. Who'd have thunk it?

--
JHG

 

[moltenmetal]

It's a sad day for public protection and for Ontario's engineers, for sure. We're the only province in Canada with an industrial exemption. Thanks to the business lobby and a provincial government with no backbone, now we're stuck with it.

The exemption applies only to engineering done for an employer on their means of production by their employees, i.e. design work done by a millwright or an electrician on their own employer's production line, plant etc. However, from an enforcement perspective, it is treated as if it were the same general exemption for engineering done in industry (rather than for the general public) that exists in many US states.

For some reason, the Ontario government continue to think that an employee is more willing to be injured by incompetent engineering work done on their employer's production equipment than any other member of the general public. Of course they also assume that the consequences of the incompetent engineering won't be felt beyond the plant gate. As a chemical engineer, the fact that my mistakes may have consequences well beyond the plant gate is never lost on me.

Licensing engineers may not be 100% effective at ensuring that all engineering work done is done competently. One thing is certain, though: it is more effective at that sort of protection than allowing employers to be the sole judge of an engineer's competence.

 

[Gymmeh]

I just got the news yesterday, and thought to check back here.

I typically side on the best interest of society...less on the side of corporations.

Here is a nice local example, that they finally resolved. In this case the locals pushed the government to go after the company, typically the Gov't isn't willing and or able to do so. I firmly believed that if you have someone assigned responsibility for something like this (i.e. someones head will roll) you would not find this happening as much. This case is an exception but in most cases managers are able to hide behind the corporate shield and there is only a fine so there is little or no incentive for people the act in the best interest of society.

http://www.epa.gov/region2/capp/TCC/index.html

http://www.buffalonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130529/OPINION/130529191/1074

needless to say i support moltenmetal.

 

[IRstuff]

That's bit a of a stretch, I think Are there even engineers at this facility that would fall under the exclusion? There may be people who are called engineers working there, but are they? And if there were no exclusion, wouldn't they simply be named something else? Whoever did the actual engineering is probably long gone or retired or was never an employee. By all accounts, the design is not at fault; it appears to be a confluence of running the system beyond its rated limits to increase production and allowing emissions of hazardous gases. Seems to me that all of the people involved are not engineers, and even with no exemption, it's not obvious that there would any PEs on the premise.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[drawoh]

That's bit a of a stretch, I think Are there even engineers at this facility that would fall under the exclusion?

Would there have been professional engineers available in 1917 when the plant was built?

Not surprisingly, I am not a lawyer, but I believer the operative word here is mischief. Something of yours gets loose and causes damage, and you are legally responsible.

How many industrial accidents in Ontario are caused by unlicensed "engineers"? This is kind of relevant here.

--
JHG

 

[LionelHutz]

I don't really see the relevance. In theory, if there was a PE on site in charge of the plant design, the PE could have whistle blown on the plant and then he would either be fired or forced to quit. The plant would likely still continue polluting until the EPA finally could be bothered to do something about it. It's very easy for management to over rule a PE and it's also very easy for the authorities to ignore complains about bad practices.

There are laws in Canada that can hold people in charge criminally liable if someone is injured in their facility due to neglect. I'm not sure if this extends to people outside the facility injured due to something being released by into the air or water by the facility but it might.

 

[IRstuff]

"I'm not sure if this extends to people outside the facility injured due to something being released by into the air or water by the facility but it might."

There's a long pole in the process of determining cause and effect for industrial pollution, as compared to an out-and-out building collapse or somesuch.

TTFN
faq731-376

Need help writing a question or understanding a reply? forum1529

 

[LionelHutz]

Yes, it's always difficult to determine cause and effect in any situation where it's not a simple case of direct injury. No machine guard allowed a hand to be crushed is much simpler to deal with than allowing exposure to a chemical caused cancer is to deal with. Knowing this doesn't answer if management at a plant could be held criminally responsible for the second situation happening to the general public around the plant.

 

[PHovnanian]

Yes, it's always difficult to determine cause and effect in any situation where it's not a simple case of direct injury.

But that's what we have federal, state and local codes for. If they say "keep emissions or exposure below a certain level", its the job of the engineer designing the process to comply. Industry standards may be in place to cover these situations as well, so absent explicit laws or regulations, best practices would be compliance with these.

When I design electrical installations, there are rules and standards for touch and step potential, arc flash incident energy, etc. I don't have to re-think whether a certain condition may or may not be dangerous. I just design to these codes as a minimum.

 

[LionelHutz]

I think you completely missed the point of my posts. My point was that it doesn't matter if a licensed engineer is involved or not if said engineer is ignored when he whistle blows. Having laws that hold management criminally responsible when they knowingly put lives at risk helps.

 

[FeX32]

"after reviewing all the Hansards between 1983 to 1984, unfortunately, no clear rationale can be found for introducing the industrial exception."

Simply to compensate unregulated engineering professionals less.


"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." L. da Vinci
- Gian