Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: Salary Survey[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: "'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: Salary Survey
- From: "Antonio J. Arthay, P.E." <tarthay(--nospam--at)wkminc.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 1999 09:34:03 -0500
I could not agree more. I think that the engineering societies should be spending more time and money promoting the general public's awareness of what engineers do for society. I think we generally have an image problem, which simply needs more work, since the nature of our business is generally hidden from plain view. A personal effort from each of us to educate all people we have contact with on a daily basis would be an excellent start!! Antonio J. Arthay, P.E. -----Original Message----- From: Neil Glaser [SMTP:NGlaser(--nospam--at)pkainc.com] Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 6:46 AM To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org Subject: Re: Salary Survey Scott Maxwell wrote: > I would disagree with your comments about architects. Yes, for the most > part an architect is not trained to do what we do as structural engineers, > but they typically do have some minimal structural courses. Can an > architect do what we do? Generally, no. But can we do what an architect > does? > I disagree with your statements. I've never seen nor heard of architect that could do what we do; but I know a lot of them that think they can. Can I do what an architect does? No, but I also don't pretend that I can. I repeatedly sit in meetings or have discussions with architects about the size of structural members. They always think that they can suggest the size for the member; they are always very surprised when they here the size that is required because it typically is substantially larger than they expect. Just because someone has had a course in structural engineering does not mean that they understand engineering principles or are capable of making decisions based upon the little knowledge they have of the subject. I had a course in psychology once; I guess by your theory that means that I am qualified to make reasonable assumptions that would be about the same as a qualified psychologist would make. I can tell you this much, I wouldn't even be able to come close. I am licensed engineer - I took the civil exam. Therefore, I am technically qualified to practice in any field of civil engineering. I only practice structural engineering because I don't feel that I am qualified to practice in the other disciplines even though I have the background in those disciplines. Exposure to structural engineering doesn't give architects any idea of what it really takes to design a structure. The problem is that the public perception is that all buildings are "structurally designed" by architects. Architects give the perception that they are responsible for the stability of the building and not just the appearance. This is repeatedly enforced through the media. Our salaries will not escalate until the public becomes educated about what we do. When buildings collapse due to natural causes, the media blames everything on "shoddy construction". I'll admit poor construction is a large factor in many failures, but what about the cases where it was poor engineering. These cases don't seem to gain media attention. If the public new that the reason the building collapsed and killed 50 people was because an engineer screwed up, they might be willing to pay more for the best engineering services that they can possibly buy. Until the perception changes about the importance of our work, salaries will not escalate.
- Prev by Subject: Re: Salary Survey
- Next by Subject: RE: Salary Survey
- Previous by thread: Re: Salary Survey
- Next by thread: RE: Salary Survey