Hello,

I'm one of those lousy engineers who reads this list occasionally and rarely chimes in. But this has been a good topic, so I think I'll take a shot. It's hard to address this issue without being controversial, so I hope you take it in the spirit it was intended.

A typical senior-level engineering position requires a knowledge of economics, management, psychology (to some extent), negotiation, and electrical, mechanical, civil, chemical, etc. engineering. Most of the technicians' comments to this thread have focused on comparing their specific skills, like programming, to an engineer's.

In my experience, technicians (forgive my generalization
for a moment) tend to miss the big picture. They're very
good at analyzing and diagnosing a specific piece of
equipment, but they fail to see how that equipment fits
into the overall system. Similarly, they fail to see how engineers fit into the overall system. Engineers may have responsibility and accountability for the budget, schedule and technical performance of several different projects. A decision, made by some other manager, or a client, could impact one of these projects, and force the engineer to make a decision that appears to be incorrect or inconsistent to the technician. Engineers also have to defend their decisions to managers, clients, and vice presidents. And they will protect technicians from the wrath that company management can bring. These are very real and common issues that engineers have to deal with. If you punch your time sheet, go home and forget about the job, you're probably not dealing with those issues.

Thanks.

Eric Kelner
Senior Research Engineer
Southwest Research Institute
San Antonio, TX
210-522-3309

(My Opinion - Not my Employer's)

 

Wrong, please do not assume that because someone gives you some engineering related duties that you are truly acting as an engineer. It is more likely that they are trying to minimize the engineering costs by having someone with out a degree perform in such positions. Although I agree that experience does make the engineer, lack of a professional degree confirms the fact that the duties are only temporary. As a true engineer will understand.

 

So am I to believe that all of our university's and colleges should require passing of the PE exam before allowing their graduates to be considered engineers. Apparently we should all be Engineers in training or BSEIT's until we have passed the coveted PE exam.

 

Most states say exactly that. You are not an Engineer in any way, shape, or form, nor should you represent yourself as such, until or unless licensed as such by the authority having jurisdiction. The Universities do not bestow that title.

George G. Robertson, P.E.
Manager of Engineering
Saulsbury E & C
(915) 498-6080 ext 232
[email protected]

 

I have to disagree. As I work in the steel industry holding a BSEE w/o a PE as an automation engineer how am I committing a fraud by not completing the PE license process. Although, I have passed the EIT, the addition of this license will not advance my career nor increase my salary in my present position...in other words there is not incentive to complete the PE. Furthermore, I can not believe you would classify degreed engineers w/o a PE as "graduates starting an internship" , if it is accountability you are referring to I assure you I am as accountable for my work as my PE counterparts with BSEE's. Am I less qualified/skilled because I do not posses a stamp that says I have passed an 8 hour test. I see the PE as nothing more than a line on your resume under BSEE. Most of my associates who are certified as PE's make no use of their seal.

 

My friends father was working on obtaining his PE while running a rather large business, family and the usual. I saw him about a year later and asked if ever obtained his license. He replied, "No, but I have three working for me."

In America, YOU control your own destiny.


Kirk S. Hegwood
President
Signing for Hegwood Electric Service, Inc.
[email protected]

 

All good points, but don't put "Engineer" on your shingle if you go into business for yourself, nor represent yourself as such if your company offers your services to others in most jurisdictions.

It's a legal question, not a technical one. The thing is, the states have elected to endeavor to protect the public from unsafe engineering practices by registering and controlling who is represented as an Engineer. In much the same way, you can at least hope that your doctor is qualified to practice. Your assurance that he is qualified has nothing to do with your
personal knowledge of his training, experience, nor expertise. That assurance is solely based upon his credentials and recognition as such by
the authority having jurisdiction.

When we use terms such as, "Network Engineer", "Field Engineer", "Domestic
Engineer" etc., we weaken the term in the eyes of the public, and limit the effectiveness of the authorities in providing protection.

Incidentally, I DO NOT want an engineer acting as an electrician on my property! Most jurisdictions like to license electricians for the same reasons stated above.



George G. Robertson, P.E.
Manager of Engineering
Saulsbury E & C
(915) 498-6080 ext 232
[email protected]

 

Dear Electricians, Engineers and Technicians:

I have read all of the discourse on this subject and I feel that each camp has some valid points. Maybe the following can help to bring both sides
into agreement.

For the record I am a graduate Electrical Engineer and a licensed PE.

As a wide-eyed kid out of high school I turned down the opportunity to go to work as an electrician to pursue my dream of being an Electrical Engineer. I believe I could have been a successful electrician, and I am convinced that in due time I would have self-taught myself into a competent controls technician. But in no way should anyone fool themselves into believing that they are as good as a graduate engineer, unless they have attended formal classes. The background that is received in at an accredited Engineering University cannot be learned on the street. Even as an apprentice to an experienced graduate engineer, the information that is gleaned is only perfunctory at best.

On the other hand I believe that every graduate engineer should spend some time in the "trenches" before actually assuming the title of Engineer. After graduation from college, I spent the first few years of my career as an Installation and Service Engineer. The job duties describe the job exactly. I installed, started-up, and serviced equipment. Essentially, I was a glorified technician. These were the most valuable years of my career.

This combination of formal education plus time in the "field" equals a Professional Engineer.

Imagine if we took doctors directly out of medical school and unleashed them on the world without an internship. Better yet imagine if we let anyone interested in being a doctor practice medicine and allow them to learn along the way. We pay good money for a "doctor" because we believe that his or her education and experience combine to make him or her a competent professional.

This brings me to my final point. Almost every one of the e-mails I have read has the word "money' imbedded somewhere in the text; either implicitly or implied. This all started because of the electrician who believed that he is doing engineering work and should get paid as an engineer! I am not going to disagree that a good electrician or technician deserves to be paid commensurate with his or her experience, but that does not justify bestowing the title of Engineer, nor should he or she be permitted to povide engineering services.

It is for this reason that engineering is not a profession, but rather an occupation. Until engineers unite and decide that only those engineers that meet a specific criteria should use the title Engineer, we will continue to be paid as glorified electricians or technicians. People who truly need "engineering" services should be required to seek out an "Engineer" the same way a sick person seeks out a doctor.

Best regards to all,

Joe Rizzolo, PE

 

I guess there is nothing really new under the sun. This thread sounds like one about 2 years ago... "to PE or not to PE?" Except it's now "to IT, ET, or EE!"

Happy New Year to all.

Regards,
Phil Corso, PE
(Boca Raton, FL)

 

List,

From the on-line Merriam-Webster's dictionary, www.m-w.com

Note the logical OR in the 3 b definition.

Main Entry: 1. en-gi-neer
Pronunciation: "en-j&-'nir
Function: noun
Etymology: alter. of earlier enginer, from Middle English, alteration of enginour, from Middle French engigneur, from Old French engignier to contrive, from engin
Date: 14th century
1 : a member of a military group devoted to engineering work
2 obsolete : a crafty schemer : PLOTTER
3 a : a designer or builder of engines b : a person who is trained in or follows as a profession a branch of engineering c : a person who carries through an enterprise by skillful or artful contrivance 4 : a person who runs or supervises an engine or an apparatus

Perhaps we should distinguish between engineers and PEs:

Main Entry: 1. pro-fes-sion-al
Pronunciation: pr&-'fesh-n&l, -'fe-sh&-n&l
Function: adjective
Date: circa 1748
1 a : of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession b : engaged in one of the learned professions c (1) : characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical standards of a profession (2) : exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, and generally businesslike manner in the workplace 2 a : participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a professional golfer> b : having a particular profession as a permanent career <a professional soldier> c : engaged in by persons receiving financial return <professional football> 3 : following a line of conduct as though it were a profession <a professional patriot>


Regards,

Willy Smith

 

On Sun, 30 Dec 2001, List Manager wrote:
> I have read all of the discourse on this subject and I feel that each
> camp has some valid points. Maybe the following can help to bring both
> sides into agreement.

OK, OK, OK. I can't stand this any more. It's gone on long enough that we're solidly entrenched in *MY* area now.

What am I? I'm a small business owner, but I was a philosophy major. (It's a long story; the short of it is this field pays a better.)

We're locked in this discussion because we're committing a classic 2500 year old fallacy first described (but probably understood far earlier) by a guy named Aristotle in a book the title of which roughly translates as "Logic." I'm sure you've all heard of him. Some of you may have read the book. It's known as the Fallacy of Equivocation.

From http://gncurtis.home.texas.net/

"Equivocation is the type of ambiguity which occurs when a single word or phrase is ambiguous, and this ambiguity is not grammatical but lexical. So, when a phrase equivocates, it is not due to grammar, but to the phrase as a whole having two distinct meanings."

The various meanings of "engineer" are getting in the way. Someone asked if Edison couldn't be considered an engineer. Well, where I happen to live, no he's not "legally" an engineer.

The business I own cannot be an "engineering firm" because the owner, that's me, doesn't have a P.E. License. That doesn't mean I can't hire a P.E. who is licensed to sign off on things. But
*I* can't sign off on things, and my company cannot list itself in the yellow pages as an engineering firm.

So, there are a bunch of rules about "legally" being an engineer.

But what about the fact that lots of plant "engineers" have hired my firm to do "engineering" work? Well most of those people did have an "engineering" degree, but few of them had a P.E. license. And the work my guys did for them was "engineering" work in the sense that we designed and made the stuff work. But it wasn't "legally" engineering. It is "technically" engineering if you consider another definition. But this points out the how we're talking about multiple definitions.

So, unless we're going to define "engineer" we're never going to resolve this. And I'd wager that the discussion to define the word could go on for months because it has a bunch of ego/money/who_knows_what attached to it.

MB
--
Michael R. Batchelor - Industrial Informatics & Instrumentation, Inc. Linux is like a wigwam... No windows, no gates. Apache inside.

 

And what of the Engineer driving a train? This usage of the term predates most, if not all, state licensing regulations for P.E.

I worked for a marine electrical contractor who had gotten a state contract for a new engine installation on a ferry. As an electrical foreman I wound up doing all the preliminary drawings, which then had to be "blessed" by a P.E. electrical engineer. The P.E. hadn't a clue about marine systems, made some trivial (and useless) changes to my drawings, stamped them and went off with his rather large fee.

My point? All issues of law aside, engineers do the work of engineers, P.E.'s occasionally included.

Morten Nilsen, retired field service engineer

Z-N Enterprises
Fax: +1 206 374 2164
E-mail: [email protected]

 

Hi All

I have been resisting the urge to get on this one, but as I am now well relaxed after Xmas and don't have to read any more email till next year would like to share the following.

Engineer : Like a technician with more theory then he will ever be able to use, and too little practical capability to be a technician

Technician: Far too little theory to be an engineer and so much pratical capability that he doesn't need 90% of the theory, but he's really screwed when he gets to the last 10% (I am a technician by qualification)

Millwright: Electrician who can spell technician correctly every time as well as other complex words like mechanical engineer, but who is a heart what is known as a jack of all trades.

Mechanician: Cross between a mechanic and an electrician, in other words a good electrician with some secondary skills.

Electrician: Enough theory to understand what he does pratically and good at pratical application of electrical principles. Learns well by experience, for obvious reasons.

I have 20 years + of automation and control behind my back and I call myself an engineer when cornered as it makes the conversation a lot shorter. I used to care about things like this but not anymore, I now work for myself and my track record is my pride and my advertising campaign rolled into one. I am quite successful because I understand my field of expertise better than most, I know as close as humanly possible, everything about the control aspects of the machine I am working on before I start working on it, if I have to ask an engineer how some parts of it work and what the theory behind it is, I feel no shame, I also have to ask the electrician how the cabling routes are structured, and the mechanician how well it operates, I even may have to ask the machine driver what is wrong with the machine, I certainly wouldn't be there if he didn't know there was a problem! Not one of these things denigrates my position as an automation specialist as is demonstrated by my very presence on site.

I have been designing control systems for a very long time now, more than 1/2 of my career, I still do not attempt the electrical design of switchgear, especially MV and HV although I have enough background to put together a working system. I still do not get involved in the design or selection of instrumentation other than its interface to the PLC although I have seen so many successfully designed plants that it is easy to take a page out of someone elses book and recommend the correct solution from past experience. In this regard, I will never be an engineer, am already performing well outside the scope of work of a technician, and surely don't fit the job description of any of the other categories of players in my field.

I still cannot introduce myself to people as Donald the PLC and automation specialist, this gets the response "who's that arrogant fool", well I am also arrogant, but only when I feel like it, so I call myself an engineer, and never ever write anything in brackets after my name, at least that way I am not telling any lies and don't have to have this very discussion with every new person I meet.

Donald Pittendrigh

 

Well, no.

Engineers complain about it a lot, but as one previous post said, it isn't about knowledge it is about liability.

Professional Engineering Registration is about professional liability. It has absolutely nothing to do with the knowledge or experience needed to _engineer._ PE registration and licensure is about determining if you fulfil the basic criteria necessary to permit you to practice on your own as a consulting engineer.

This is acknowledged by the "company exemption" under which any person may be assigned duties of an engineer within the company in which he or she works, without having a professional engineering license or registration. The law clearly recognizes that there are people who may not possess a PE License who are fully capable of functioning as an engineer.

The law in most jurisdictions, however, prevents anyone from setting up _in private practice_ as an engineer without licensure.

However, anyone can fill an engineering position, such as Product Development Engineer, or Process Engineer, _within a company_ and under the liability shield of the company, and it is not illegal to do so, nor is it illegal to call yourself by your job title.

That is how Microsoft and Novell get away with their Network Engineer certifications, among other things.

Lack of a professional degree only confirms the lack of a professional degree. Or do you claim that Edison, or Bessemer, or Marconi, or (insert long list of others) was not a true engineer?

Walt Boyes

 

Actually Walt, in Canada nobody (including Microsoft) is getting away with it.

A press release excerpt from "http://www.peo.on.ca/communications/mcse_relse.htm":http://www.peo.on.ca/communications/mcse_relse.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Ottawa, Ont., May 11, 2001 - After discussions with Canada's engineering profession, Microsoft Corp. will advise Canadian holders of its MCSE certification not to call themselves engineers or use the full title Microsoft Certified System Engineers.

Microsoft's decision should prevent Canadian holders of the MCSE certification from inadvertently breaking provincial and territorial laws, which protect the public by restricting the use of the titles "engineer" and "engineering" and the practice of engineering in Canada to licensed professional engineers. ... Microsoft is currently researching alternatives for the MCSE credential worldwide, which could result in a new name for the credential later this year. ... "
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Anthony Kerstens P.Eng.

 

You're right, Michael...now for some more serious logic chopping.

The equivocation is between the generic "engineer" and the specific term "consulting engineer".

Your company can do engineering, as a result of its other businesses...like system integration, etc. What you're not allowed to do is to set yourself up in private practice as a consulting engineer.

That is the basis of the "company exemption" I talked about.

Consulting Engineers are licensed. Engineers are not. PEs are assumed to be, for the purposes of law, Consulting Engineers, even when they work for a company as a full time employee, whenever they use their PE stamp on drawings.

Ain't logic grand??

Walt Boyes

---------------------------------------------
Walt Boyes -- MarketingPractice Consultants
[email protected]
21118 SE 278th Place - Maple Valley, WA 98038
253-709-5046 cell 425-432-8262 home office
fax:801-749-7142 ICQ: 59435534

"Strategic marketing, sales and electronic
business consulting for the small and medium-sized
enterprise: http://www.waltboyes.com"
---------------------------------------------

 

that was well said. i am also a p.e. with a mech engr degree. the lions share of my work is in hvac and industrial process controls. i know 4/20 loops, pid tuning, 3-line schematics, flame safeguard and the other items that go along with the electrical end of the business. it never seems to amaze me though at how few electricians know this stuff and then claim they know it.

you hit the nail on the head; until the professional engineering community unites, engr will never get the same respect as lawyers, doctors, or even accountants. it burns me up every time i see some 20 yr old say he is a "microsoft certified network engineer".

last thing; people that do not think they are being paid what they are worth have two options; leave and go find other work or stay and pout.

 

In Europe however everybody gets away with it.

Pat!!!

 

I have a bachelors degree in Industrial Technology and have filled engineering positions for over ten years. I am careful to not commit myself to lead any project that requires very in depth math and physics that I did not have in college. However, most "engineering" jobs are not very theoretical and favor experience and practical knowledge. I think that my degree serves me better than most true engineering degrees for my line of work (controls and manufacturing)

I know many engineers that say that they never use any of the knowledge that they gained in college, isn't that a shame. When I was working as a mfg. engineer, I used 75% of what I learned in college on a regular basis. So, I guess it depends on the type of work that you do.

My college considers me to be a technologist. I do not like that term because most people think technician. There is nothing wrong with technicians, but I have far more theoretical knowledge than most technicians. I am just not quite at an engineers level when it comes to using math and physics to solve a problem.

By the way, when I was freelancing I put "Automation Specialist" on my business card.

Bill Sturm

B.S. in Industrial Technology
Major: Computer Assisted Manufacturing
Eastern Michigan University

 

That's strange, when I suggested to my employer that they had been defrauded and all the equipment I designed shouldn't be working and wasn't blessed by the right people, he grinned briefly then asked me when the rotor inspection station would be done because they need another type of voltage regulators tested. I suppose I could demand a pay cut to get their attention. I feel _so_ unworthy. I think I'll write software the rest of the day.

Regards

cww

--
Free Tools!
Machine Automation Tools (LinuxPLC) Free, Truly Open & Publicly Owned
Industrial Automation Software For Linux. mat.sourceforge.net.
Day Job: Heartland Engineering, Automation & ATE for Automotive Rebuilders.
Consultancy: Wide Open Technologies: Moving Business & Automation to Linux.