Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: Shameful Pancakes??[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: Shameful Pancakes??
- From: "Dennis Wish" <dennis.wish(--nospam--at)verizon.net>
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 15:55:00 -0700
Jason, SEA and other professional association don't always have the interest of the professional community at heart - this was typical with the adoption of the 97 UBC as related to light-frame wood construction. Professional Associations must be involved in state and federal politics, but they must fairly represent the needs and the desires of the members of the organizations they represent. When any committee goes forth to produce a code or methodology that does not justly represent what practitioners feel are in the best interest of the public, then they act as rouges and their political influence is used unethically. This happens when committees are formed to produced work that will ultimately be submitted for potential adoption into the next building code. However, none of the committees that I have been associated with - including the BSSC TS-7, SEAOC Seismology or the NCSEA Advocacy committees post drafts of their work or have information related sites to inform the professional community of their intent to change or modify the present code. By the time the changes are discovered by the professional practitioner, it is generally too late. Because of this, the influence on the political appeal to help a state adopt a code is used with the interest of a very few at heart. Specifically, those who do not design low-rise or custom residential homes are the least qualified to determine how their changes will affect the profession. I wanted to use the phrase "affect the business of engineering" but I know that I would be flamed for suggesting that the business or practice of our profession should be considered on any level with life safety intent of the code, but the conservativeness of the life safety provisions creates incentives for clients to seek other lesser performing methods of design available to the clients. Specifically I am referring to the constant war between Designers and Engineers who wish to use the prescriptive provisions of the code which is "politically" backed by the Building Industry Association" (BIA) and the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) as well as the American Institute of Architect (AIA) who have such a strong political lobby that I believe the engineering community has given up arguing that all prescriptive methods should be equal to or more conservative than the minimum level of compliance to the engineered provisions. Politics is all around us. In my opinion those who choose to volunteer for active participation in any association committee have an obligation to represent the members of the professional community and not their own self-interest. We currently have a measure of the professional community and this is in the SEAINT and Structuralist.Net Listservices. There are other discussion forums that exist but from my experience the issues relevant to structural engineering are a very minor portion of their site. Still, these voices should be allowed the courtesy of consideration in the code creation process AND each association should be required to publicly post their drafts and minutes as to what is coming down the line so that the professional community can respond before the final draft is ready for submission to the ICC to be voted on. Dennis S. Wish, PE -----Original Message----- From: Jason Kilgore [mailto:jkilgore(--nospam--at)leok.com] Sent: Friday, August 01, 2003 11:11 AM To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org Subject: Shameful Pancakes?? If Stan calls some of his politician friends and tries to acquire projects through "back channels", then he is guilty of illegal and unethical behavior. I saw nothing in that post or any posts related to it indicating that this is the case, and cannot figure out how his morals came into question. ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp * * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to: * * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp * * Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. 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: http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
- Shameful Pancakes??
- From: Jason Kilgore
- Shameful Pancakes??
- Prev by Subject: Shameful Pancakes??
- Next by Subject: RE: Shameful Pancakes??
- Previous by thread: Shameful Pancakes??
- Next by thread: RE: Shameful Pancakes??