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

Re: Engineering compensation

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gerard Madden" <GMadden(--nospam--at)>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 5:34 PM
Subject: RE: Engineering compensation

I hear ya loud and clear on the fees issue. Sometimes I think it is better
to do a lousy job and charge low fees because those guys always get the
jobs - especially in low-rise commercial. Architects want it all for

Take care,

This is something I just cannot accept.  It is never "better" to lower
yourself to the level of general incompetence.  These are the same attitudes
that produce the garbage drawings referred to in the plancheck thread.
Architects who employ lousy engineering firms based on bottom dollar
eventually get what they deserve, plancheck delays, construction delays,
unhappy clients, litigation, and loss of future work.

Engineers need to learn that we pick our clients as much as they pick us.  I
have several architectural firms I simply will not work with because they
either want everything for nothing, or produce such low quality work product
I don't want to be associated with them.  I have not seen a decline in my
gross billings as a result, in fact quite the opposite.  If you fill your
schedule with low fee work you have lost the opportunity to pursue quality

I would rather spend my day at the golf course, or close my practice, before
I would allow myself to feel pressured into producing sub-standard work.

Paul Feather

*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: