Shadrach
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 676
- Likes
- 980
You did. Post altered to reflect as much.
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
When is an electrical engineer not an engineer?
- Thread starter Berwhale
- Start date
I have a degree in Mechanical Engineering from Imperial College, London. That makes me an engineer IMO. I could become a member of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers (I am qualified to be a Fellow in fact) but haven't needed it, and have not.
IMO each stage of examination just qualifies one to take the next stage, if you do well enough. In the UK when I was going through it that was "O" levels, leading to "A" levels then University if one did well enough.
Once one had a degree you got a job and, IME, once you had proved that you were any good never again needed to refer to qualifications.
Subsequently it is promotion according to merit not paperwork.
I'm not sure what the situation is now as it's not something I've kept myself informed about but certainly at one time in the UK the engineering council offered an alternative route to CEng for people with no university education. Knowledgeable people who satisfied the competency requirement could sit the engineering council exams which were considered equivalent to degree level education. The exams were no walk in the park and were genuinely set at a level equivalent to degree level education, but I think it is reasonable to offer an alternative route which is equivalent to the more normal degree route.
On formal education being obsolete, I'm really not sure about that. Yes, alternative learning routes are great and to be welcomed, but college and university education is still useful. I know it's popular to decry theoretical knowledge and say people don't use anything they learn as a student once they walk out of the doors of an educational institute for the last time but I'd question this as a lot of the underpinning knowledge that facilitates ongoing learning or which underpins decision making (even if not consciously) goes back to learning basic principles at college or university. I wouldn't say I use the theory I learned at college and university every day but I've used it quite a lot. OK, I've spent time working in roles where my job was essentially entirely engineering theory based (mainly torsional vibration and combustion thermodynamics, two odd bed fellows) but even in ship yards there were numerous times where being able to do quick calculations on the back of the metaphorical envelope and derive things from first principles was extremely useful.
On formal education being obsolete, I'm really not sure about that. Yes, alternative learning routes are great and to be welcomed, but college and university education is still useful. I know it's popular to decry theoretical knowledge and say people don't use anything they learn as a student once they walk out of the doors of an educational institute for the last time but I'd question this as a lot of the underpinning knowledge that facilitates ongoing learning or which underpins decision making (even if not consciously) goes back to learning basic principles at college or university. I wouldn't say I use the theory I learned at college and university every day but I've used it quite a lot. OK, I've spent time working in roles where my job was essentially entirely engineering theory based (mainly torsional vibration and combustion thermodynamics, two odd bed fellows) but even in ship yards there were numerous times where being able to do quick calculations on the back of the metaphorical envelope and derive things from first principles was extremely useful.
Shadrach
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 676
- Likes
- 980
I used to be registered many years ago. I didn't like having to pay the fees and I thought the registration system inflexible and elitist.
But, registration got me work. This doesn't mean I was against the necessity to register; the system just needed adjustment, not throwing out.
With domestic audio I don't suppose any of this matters much although I still find it irritating when every Tom Dick and Harry announces that they are Electrical Engineers and later one finds out they don't have the relevant qualifications and are not registered. It's part of why domestic audio isn't taken very seriously. This is bad for engineering and bad for domestic audio. It's great for the Charlatans though.
Given I was an Engineer over 30 years ago, I would expect, should I reapply for the title, to be reexamined. A lot has changed in 30 years.
I used a lot of what I learned at University in my work.
There often seems to be a desire to be partly defined by ones work. Why does it matter to some whether they are Engineers, electricians, technicians, or tradesmen? I'm quite content with my current title of Bucket Boy. I suppose some egos are more fragile than others.
I'm also slightly alarmed at how causally academic study is dismissed, but this seems to be fashionable currently.
But, registration got me work. This doesn't mean I was against the necessity to register; the system just needed adjustment, not throwing out.
With domestic audio I don't suppose any of this matters much although I still find it irritating when every Tom Dick and Harry announces that they are Electrical Engineers and later one finds out they don't have the relevant qualifications and are not registered. It's part of why domestic audio isn't taken very seriously. This is bad for engineering and bad for domestic audio. It's great for the Charlatans though.
Given I was an Engineer over 30 years ago, I would expect, should I reapply for the title, to be reexamined. A lot has changed in 30 years.
I used a lot of what I learned at University in my work.
There often seems to be a desire to be partly defined by ones work. Why does it matter to some whether they are Engineers, electricians, technicians, or tradesmen? I'm quite content with my current title of Bucket Boy. I suppose some egos are more fragile than others.
I'm also slightly alarmed at how causally academic study is dismissed, but this seems to be fashionable currently.
See #62. Like I said, I'd argue it the other way as a matter of LEGAL restrictions on your ability to practice and someone hiring you by their choice (absent a fraudulent claim of a certification you don't have).
I do not belong to AAAS or American Chemical Society because I have strong objections to their use of member fees. So should I not be allowed to do science or call myself a scientist or chemist?
Indeed it does. I oppose state-mandated professional licensure, period.
Shadrach
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 676
- Likes
- 980
So you would be happy employing a lawyer who wasn't registered with The Law Society?
Should you have your house surveyed with a view to sale or alterations would you be happy with some chap who had no relevant qualifications?
When you go to see a doctor would you be happy with a doctor who wasn't registered with the appropriate body, whatever that may be where you live?
When you drive access a suspension bridge isn't it at all reassuring that certified engineers have examined the structure and deemed it safe, or would a guy who said he built an awesome bridge with a Lego set do?
There is a distinction between "me freely choosing whether or not someone I hire has credential XYZ" and "the government deciding that I may not hire someone with credential XYZ."
Shadrach
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 676
- Likes
- 980
From what I understand that isn't the case. From what I've read in the article in the OP it just says you can't call the person an engineer unless they are registered and if they are not registered, they are not permitted to sign off certain documents and products as engineers.
You can hire who you like. You cannot and they cannot represent themselves or another person as engineers, unless they are registered engineers.
What on earth all that nonsense about free speech has to do with it is beyond me.
Again, that excludes every top EE I named as being able to be called an engineer or work in that profession in Arizona (and quite a few other states). It excludes several close friends with PhDs in engineering. It prevents anyone not paying tribute to the cartel and its cronies from doing engineering work (disclaimer: that includes me as the manager of an engineering department). All in order to maintain a cartel and an income stream to the "certifying" organizations. That makes no sense for anyone other than the cartel.
edit: to further clarify, I am talking about legal conflation of the term "engineer" with "Registered Professional Engineer" or similar. If one is not the latter and claims it, that's fraud. But the latter is NOT the same thing as the former, despite the rent-seeking by the cartel.
Last edited:
Shadrach
Addicted to Fun and Learning
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2019
- Messages
- 676
- Likes
- 980
Does it say in the article or the relevant legislation that you may not hire XYZ?
Lets deal with this first.
The answer is no; just to save you writing. So, why bring it up?
All I'm getting from your arguments is a lot of emotive debate regarding your freedoms to do what you want
Life just isn't like that.
If you are prepared to answer any of the questions I've put forward I'm happy to reply. This we should all be able to call ourselves whatever we want stuff is a pointless argument and I'm bored with it.
You don't agree with the registration process for Engineers. That's fine. I think you're wrong and I've tried to cite examples of why I beleive it's advisable.
I've got friends with PhD's in engineering. Are they Engineers? No, not unless they are registered. They may be jolly clever chaps but they are not Engineers. Many could easily be Engineers if they applied to the relevant institutes. Until such time they are doctors (You have the right to call yourself a doctor with a PhD I believe).
Yes, for engineering tasks. And that XYZ may not use the terms "engineer" or "engineering" irrespective of experience or competence.
https://ij.org/press-release/lawsuit-challenges-arizona-engineering-licensing-law/
Here’s the law in question. Note how EE, Manufacturing Engineering, Computer Engineering, and the like have been lumped into this.
(Disclosure: I am a donor to the Institute of Justice)
Arizona 32-101
10. "Engineer" means a person who, by reason of special knowledge of the mathematical and physical sciences and the principles and methods of engineering analysis and design acquired by professional education and practical experience, is qualified to practice engineering and is registered as a professional engineer pursuant to this chapter.
11. … A person shall be deemed to be practicing or offering to practice engineering if the person practices any branch of the profession of engineering, or by verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, card or any other manner represents that the person is a professional engineer or is able to perform or does perform any engineering service or other service recognized by educational authorities as engineering.
Here’s the law in question. Note how EE, Manufacturing Engineering, Computer Engineering, and the like have been lumped into this.
(Disclosure: I am a donor to the Institute of Justice)
Arizona 32-101
10. "Engineer" means a person who, by reason of special knowledge of the mathematical and physical sciences and the principles and methods of engineering analysis and design acquired by professional education and practical experience, is qualified to practice engineering and is registered as a professional engineer pursuant to this chapter.
11. … A person shall be deemed to be practicing or offering to practice engineering if the person practices any branch of the profession of engineering, or by verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, card or any other manner represents that the person is a professional engineer or is able to perform or does perform any engineering service or other service recognized by educational authorities as engineering.
digicidal
Major Contributor
I think the two are rather intimately related (and agree with @SIY on the licensing side). Much of the reason for the "casual dismissal of academic study" has very little to do with the aspects you are considering. The problem isn't with formal academics nor required licensing per se - it's with the relatively meaningless nature of both. And with the constant expansion of what the modern definition of "academic" is IMO.
I'm sure @SIY has been significantly impacted (as have I) with the dilemma of being forced to make a choice between competence and experience (but "inadequate" or expired credentialing) and incompetent or inexperienced (but fresh off the production line with all the stickers to show for it) employees/contractors.
Your arguments are ridiculous due to their exaggerated nature... of course, no one wants their cardiac bypass done by a non-board-certified surgeon. However, if you want to get a prescription for antibiotics due to a sinus infection... a PA will do just fine (if it weren't for the prescription part of the deal... a nurse on her first day would work) - in fact, they would do better... since the wait time for that surgeon is likely weeks out. Naturally you want the engineer who's signing off on that bridge (which thousands will drive on) to be not only certified... but have decades of experience. However, you don't need that if all you're looking for is a window put in a tool-shed.
The problem as discussed in the OP is farther reaching than even that. There are dozens of various certifications in a variety of fields which include the term "engineer" - I was once an MCSE (Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer)... but I technically under these guidelines couldn't put that on a business card (now I wouldn't even want to... but that's another matter). If someone went through 4 years of school (or more) and got a degree in electrical engineering... they are an engineer. Sure if they're working on telemetry and navigation controls on a nuke... I would want them to be required to have much, much more certification than that. But if I just need a compact USB interface added to a DAP I'm manufacturing... I shouldn't be forced to restrict my hiring and at the same time pay the "privilege tax" for those hours - just so some bureaucratic add-on can collect their pound of flesh.
TL;DR - Education and certification are definitely very important... but experience and competency (and maturity) are not necessarily proven by the number of forms one has filled out or fees one has paid. Results are a better indicator than anything... just ask all those who hired fully "papered" doctors, lawyers, etc. who were killed/injured, had mishandled cases or wrongful convictions, etc. What you do and how you do it is always more important than what title you have or where you got it from - IME at least.
I'm sure @SIY has been significantly impacted (as have I) with the dilemma of being forced to make a choice between competence and experience (but "inadequate" or expired credentialing) and incompetent or inexperienced (but fresh off the production line with all the stickers to show for it) employees/contractors.
Your arguments are ridiculous due to their exaggerated nature... of course, no one wants their cardiac bypass done by a non-board-certified surgeon. However, if you want to get a prescription for antibiotics due to a sinus infection... a PA will do just fine (if it weren't for the prescription part of the deal... a nurse on her first day would work) - in fact, they would do better... since the wait time for that surgeon is likely weeks out. Naturally you want the engineer who's signing off on that bridge (which thousands will drive on) to be not only certified... but have decades of experience. However, you don't need that if all you're looking for is a window put in a tool-shed.
The problem as discussed in the OP is farther reaching than even that. There are dozens of various certifications in a variety of fields which include the term "engineer" - I was once an MCSE (Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer)... but I technically under these guidelines couldn't put that on a business card (now I wouldn't even want to... but that's another matter). If someone went through 4 years of school (or more) and got a degree in electrical engineering... they are an engineer. Sure if they're working on telemetry and navigation controls on a nuke... I would want them to be required to have much, much more certification than that. But if I just need a compact USB interface added to a DAP I'm manufacturing... I shouldn't be forced to restrict my hiring and at the same time pay the "privilege tax" for those hours - just so some bureaucratic add-on can collect their pound of flesh.
TL;DR - Education and certification are definitely very important... but experience and competency (and maturity) are not necessarily proven by the number of forms one has filled out or fees one has paid. Results are a better indicator than anything... just ask all those who hired fully "papered" doctors, lawyers, etc. who were killed/injured, had mishandled cases or wrongful convictions, etc. What you do and how you do it is always more important than what title you have or where you got it from - IME at least.
I think the key requirement is competency to perform a given task. I think we all agree that educational credentials and professional registration are not synonymous with competency to complete a particular task.
I think we would also agree that experiential learning is important, but I would emphasise the "learning " bit as experience in itself doesn't necessarily say much. I have worked with people who have been doing a job for years without learning much just as I have worked with people with no educational certificates but who have became extremely knowledgeable and competent via experiential learning.
As engineers go up the hierarchy they tend to spend more time managing budgets, people and business functions than engineering, indeed I have had roles where if I had spent too much time on actual engineering I would have been reminded that I had others reporting to me to do that stuff. Not all engineering roles need to be regulated or subject to specific certification. In those safety critical roles where competency certification is desirable I am comfortable with the system in the UK where in many cases companies manage it themselves.
I think we would also agree that experiential learning is important, but I would emphasise the "learning " bit as experience in itself doesn't necessarily say much. I have worked with people who have been doing a job for years without learning much just as I have worked with people with no educational certificates but who have became extremely knowledgeable and competent via experiential learning.
As engineers go up the hierarchy they tend to spend more time managing budgets, people and business functions than engineering, indeed I have had roles where if I had spent too much time on actual engineering I would have been reminded that I had others reporting to me to do that stuff. Not all engineering roles need to be regulated or subject to specific certification. In those safety critical roles where competency certification is desirable I am comfortable with the system in the UK where in many cases companies manage it themselves.
It doesn't make sense for any other profession if done this way. Imagine the riots in the streets if all of a sudden no doctor could call themselves a doctor if they had to join an association and pass more tests. It is the retroactive thing that is the concern here and the fact that we already have "Professional Engineers" with those requirements.
digicidal
Major Contributor
It's a skewed perspective due to living in a city dominated by low education level service industry labor (tourism) but I'm often confronted with the following scenario (take your pick on the discipline - medical, engineering, construction, etc.):
Candidate A has 4 professional certifications, all current - and 3 open complaints or disciplinary measures on their board(s) - and 4 years experience.
Candidate B has 2 professional certs. - 1 current/1 expired - and no open complaints and only 2 in their history - which is 15 years long.
Due to some recent statute change, I technically cannot select Candidate B... because they are missing a required cert... but the results are often to become Candidate A's fourth open complaint.
Most of these ambiguous or extraneous certifications serve the same purposes as union membership in other areas. They may be a real boon to the individual as far as finding and/or keeping employment/contracts (or higher benefits/wages) - but they often serve only to frustrate and complicate the employer/contractor side of things. In many cases, to the point that I've tried to discourage developing any new government contracts - or at least padding them significantly, in order to compensate for the nightmares ahead - which then usually gets outbid.
Candidate A has 4 professional certifications, all current - and 3 open complaints or disciplinary measures on their board(s) - and 4 years experience.
Candidate B has 2 professional certs. - 1 current/1 expired - and no open complaints and only 2 in their history - which is 15 years long.
Due to some recent statute change, I technically cannot select Candidate B... because they are missing a required cert... but the results are often to become Candidate A's fourth open complaint.
Most of these ambiguous or extraneous certifications serve the same purposes as union membership in other areas. They may be a real boon to the individual as far as finding and/or keeping employment/contracts (or higher benefits/wages) - but they often serve only to frustrate and complicate the employer/contractor side of things. In many cases, to the point that I've tried to discourage developing any new government contracts - or at least padding them significantly, in order to compensate for the nightmares ahead - which then usually gets outbid.
