When is an electrical engineer not an engineer?

[DonH56]

Certify the work, not the worker...

 

[JJB70]

No, the argument is not circular. Two key points:

1) Insurance company that works in a particular field (be it architecture, construction, mortgages etc) can develop better expertise and thus be more efficient at managing risks than a single developer/builder/home buyer etc, simply by the virtue of the scale required to be an effective insurance company. If such company, using big data or whatever, discovers that it does not really need to check certifications because other variables fully explain the risks - why should the government force it to continue to do so?
2) It is much better to have the guy who pays the money (insurer/developer) decide what he needs in order to optimize his own risks/benefits, rather than having somebody outside of the transaction (legislators) decide what they must comply to.

Mandatory certification for both MDs and professional engineers alike is also a form of trade union where those who already invested in their education/certification impose a significant entry barrier on those who have not.

My point is not against certification of course but against it being mandatory: if there is a market demand for certification, it will survive.

But professional indemnity insurance is effectively an example of the market seeking professional certification. You want to know an person selling you a service has professional indemnity insurance, for obvious and sensible reasons. The insurer will require evidence of that persons professional competency to provide services which will be within the scope of the insurance policy. The insurer will decide what they need in practice but any statutory certification will almost certainly be mandatory as no one is going to insure you to provide a service you are not legally entitled to provide. After that it will vary but PE or equivalent is certainly given a gold star by many providers of such insurance when considering risk and premiums. As are your qualifications, experience and work history. I had professional insurance for years and whilst I did not actually need my CEng registration it made a big difference to both the premium and hassle of getting the policy (weirdly enough in the context of this thread, I took out insurance in preference to joining a union). I used to be friendly with the heads of engineering for a couple of the biggest insurers in the energy sector and they were the biggest advocates of professional registration because they saw a clear benefit for their organisations.

Many of the engineering bodies are easy to criticise, but many of them do a lot of extremely important and valuable work. For example ASME pressure codes are de-facto standards for many applications and are widely used not because they are mandated (although they may be in some jurisdictions and applications) but because they are very good.

I can only speak for the system in the UK but the reason our regulatory system tends to demand competency whilst avoiding systems of state licensing (there are exceptions, such as for merchant navy personnel which are subject to a system of state issued certificates of competency) is precisely to devolve decisions on what constitutes appropriate competency to those best placed to make such decisions.

 

[Vovgan]

For example ASME pressure codes are de-facto standards for many applications and are widely used not because they are mandated (although they may be in some jurisdictions and applications) but because they are very good.

That was exactly my point. As I said, I’m not against certification, only against it being mandatory: if there is a market demand for certification, it will survive.
You just gave a good example for this.

 

[j_j]

Well, according to the Arizona law as presently represented, I am not allowed to work on audio in Arizona. I have two EE degrees. I am a fellow of the Audio ENGINEERING Society. I am a Fellow (and field award winner) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic ENGINEERS.

But no, I don't know the load a 2x4 10' tall can carry.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Well, according to the Arizona law as presently represented, I am not allowed to work on audio in Arizona. I have two EE degrees. I am a fellow of the Audio ENGINEERING Society. I am a Fellow (and field award winner) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic ENGINEERS.

But no, I don't know the load a 2x4 10' tall can carry.

They have easy to use load tables for the 2x4 10ft board.

 

[j_j]

They have easy to use load tables for the 2x4 10ft board.

Yeah. I know. Why do I care? I don't build houses. I don't rig PA systems.

 

[mansr]

I don't build houses either, but I did once do the calculations for a floor to support a distributed load of 1 tonne per square metre. 20 years later, it's still standing, so I can't have screwed up too badly.

 

[SIY]

Well, according to the Arizona law as presently represented, I am not allowed to work on audio in Arizona. I have two EE degrees. I am a fellow of the Audio ENGINEERING Society. I am a Fellow (and field award winner) of the Institute of Electrical and Electronic ENGINEERS.

But no, I don't know the load a 2x4 10' tall can carry.

We'd better not catch you down here using Ohm's Law. There's a rope waitin' for you, with drop length calculated by a CERTIFIED engineer.

 

[pozz]

I'll add something analogous since finance was brought up.

There are a sea of certifications, few of which are mandatory, many of which are becoming expected. It's such an immensely social industry that nothing ends up being a good barometer of competency (titles especially). The one common demoninator im degreed backgrounds is mathematical expertise of one kind or another, regardless of academic area. If nothing else, just being wealthy is enough to enter the field as an investor.

Given especially the well-known cases of fraud, certifications are thought of as somewhat of a leveller, even an attempt to introduce principles, though the well-known frustrations with the ethics sections of exams are due to them being less about fair treatment than understanding systems of control (reporting lines, legal obligations, some of which may be conflicted) and incentive (earning potential from this decision vs. that one, and therefore probability of an unethical course).

The most visible acronyms (CFA, CPA ... and yes, MBA) are very expensive and take multiple years to attain. Women and social minorities end up carrying more certifications than white men to sit in similar roles, so the cost of participation is shifted to them. Students without prior connections also pay up and study after graduating because of the increased chances of having their resumes selected for entry-level roles (internships for investment research or analysis) outside of purely service-oriented positions (bank tellers, accountants). There are many, many glass ceilings to the most valuable jobs for which connections and certifications are basically tactics of circumvention.

It's a real problem since how smart or knowledgeable you are could easily go unnoticed, and you need to decide, if you're in, how you'll deal with that.

 

[Berwhale]

I'll add something analogous since finance was brought up.

Indeed, at one point in my career, I considered obtaining Series 7 certification as it was perceived as a pre-requisite for progression in a financial trading environment (even for someone in IT).