Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: SEAOSC Board Inquiry from Warren

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

I'm sorry you perceive our desire for strong local sections as isolationism.  We
certainly do not see it that way.  Why do we have to forsake what has made us
strong to move into the national and international arenas?  We are where we are
today because of the membership.  Strong local sections allows those members to
participate in the various committees.  Those committees then have representatives
that sit on the State committees.  With the internet we have the ability to
solicit comments from all our members on all engineering issues.  We simply need
to be more diligent in getting that information to the web and available for those
member who want to comment but are unable to participate in committee activities.
It is volunteerism which made SEAOC what it is--we now have the opportunity to
bring engineering issues right to the members at their home or office.  More
members will be able to participate.  This is not isolationism, this is increasing
our voice on the national and international levels through more participation at
home.  More opinions, stronger positions!

Fred, I hope this explains where I am coming from.  I don't feel I can speak for
the SEAOSC board but I can say that they would disagree with you on the
isolationism issue.  On the other issues you raise, I believe they would agree
with you.

Rick Ranous

FredT5(--nospam--at) wrote:

> Bill Warren asked: "Is this a proposal to centralize the four existing
> operations of the FOUR members of SEAOC, which are SEAONC, SEAOSD, SEAOCC and
> SEAOSC. I am interested in membership opinion. "
> We can have more effective organizations in several ways if you all want them.
> Issues at the state level demand a stronger, more coordinated level of
> activity than SEAOC currently supports.
> As SEAOSC repeatedly demonstrates, much is accomplished working with local
> governments and engineers at the regional level. But we shouldn't have to
> compromise our regional capabilities by the demands at the state and national
> level.
> In a similar vein, while SEAOC accomplishes remarkable feats at the national
> levels, our clout has clearly been diminished recently. SEAOC needs to change
> with the times. To be effective in the national arena, engineers should become
> more organized and increase participation under different umbrellas such as
> BSSC, NMMC, ASCE/SEI, NCSEA, ICC, and the narrower venues ACI, AISC, MSJC, and
> NDS.  (I'm not sure I've got all the alphabets in the soup.) It takes serious
> resources - time and money - to participate in a coordinated fashion in these
> groups. There are currently many outspoken, influential California engineers
> participating at the national level. One key thing we need is better
> coordination and communication between these individuals and local and state
> concerns. The internet will help immensely- if we learn how to use it wisely.
> With the July SEWC world conference in San Francisco, we may find it
> increasingly relevant to have delegates participate at the worldwide level on
> structural engineering issues.
> In all these arenas, there's no equal substitute for direct personal contact
> in meetings and by phone.
> So it comes down to two choices for future direction: We can isolate ourselves
> or expand our spheres of influence. Expansion is our only practical choice if
> we want to have a say in most future policies. That'll probably mean higher
> dues.
> I don't understand the isolationist rumblings in the South. What gives? Fred