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

Re: Uniform Licensing Requirements?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
At 10:03 PM 4/29/99 -0700, you wrote:

>The state licensing boards are needed to protect the public. How is making
>me take the test again protecting the public?
_________________________________________________

The state licensing boards all use that phrase, "protect the public", as
their justification. It is their "refuge", and in the same context as is
patriotism, in that old aphorism applied to political agendas, "Patriotism
is the last refuge of the scoundrel."    

Additional state licensing board purposes, less highly touted, also exist.
None of these boards are in the grass-growing business, but protecting local
"turf" appears to have been of keen interest in a lot of their policy
formulations.

Not just live grass, but the kind that's dead is also protectable "turf"
these days. According to the agenda package for their latest meeting, the
California PE Board is now seeking legislation to prevent Professional
Engineers from other states from retiring, letting all their PE licenses
expire, moving to California and then, without practicing anymore or
offering to practice (which is already illegal) calling themselves RETIRED
Professional Engineers. 

This legislation would allow a current California PE having 20 years tenure
under the California Board to pay a one-time fee to receive, upon surrender
of one's wall certificates, a so-called "retired" license, that permits one
to use the title "Retired PE", but not to ever practice again without taking
and passing the PE Exam anew. This doubtful privilege would not be available
to PE's moving into California and retiring soon afterwards, or in advance
of coming here. Board members speak openly and without irony that they don't
want PE's from elsewhere coming to California and being able to call
themselves Retired Professional Engineers, unless, apparently, they maintain
an active California PE License in retirement. 

Undoubtedly there is an important protection of the public at stake here.
Those non-practicing geezers from out of state can really mess up the public
if they say what they are.  As usual, the public is too ignorant and
gullible to have asked to be protected from out of state retirees; the Board
however knows this risk and is riding to the rescue.

Charles O. Greenlaw  SE    Sacramento CA 










>