Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: [Fwd: Fw: KEY ALERT: OPPOSE A.B. 1024!]

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Bill
P. Eng. is the same as P.E., just a historical 
difference AFAIK.  The professional associations
were created at the turn of the last century and
were eventually granted self-governing status by
the provincial governments--same for lawyers, 
doctors and accountants. Each province has their 
own associations.  Ontario's has an elected 
council (all engineers) and then a hired staff of
both engineers, lawyers and other odds and sods.
Lawyers to pursue the legal crap, I suppose.
There is an investigative staff, a discipline
committee, enforcement staff, licensing and 
registration, professional affairs and practises,
employment assistance people, editorial staff for
the periodical(abt 10 times per year). It is a mix
of all kinds of engineers, which I feel is wrong,
but it has been that way since day one.  Some of 
the other smaller provinces allow in geologists 
and geophysicists-Ont voted against that. The 
association staff receive complaints from the 
public, other engineers, municipal or regional
(counties) governments, etc.  They also peruse the 
yellow pages and adds in large newspapers looking 
for any one using the title "engineer" without a 
license.  I think they tend to be diligent about 
all this stuff because that justifies their 
existence.  Any time the magazine comes out, I 
immediately flip to the "blue" pages where the 
discipline cases are published.  There are 1-3 
cases in each issue of the magazine. Ninety 
percent of these cases are structural engineers 
and so I feel that we "structurals" should have 
our own association or a separate division within 
the association--British Columbia has a separate
structural division within the APEBC and I 
consider them to be the leaders within the 
provincial associations.
One thing about non-government associations, they 
are not afraid to go after anyone (including 
Microsoft over "software engineer"), as I remember 
someone on the list saying that their state board
was reluctant to spend taxpayers money taking 
offenders to court. If you make a complaint to the 
PEO, they will investigate it at no expense to
you, but it has put some poor engineers through
the wringer because of some unfounded complaints.

I think we are poorly served by the PEO, because 
they concentrate on the enforcement and do 
absolutely nothing for the members in the way of
helping them.  Their answer is that they are a 
licensing and registration body, but that does't 
stop them from putting out a glossy magazine with
articles on the latest advances in electronic 
toilets, steam operated snow shovels, the latest 
party or dinner or golf game, and the latest 
promotion of Joe Schmo at XYZ Co. I could go
on for a long time.

As for Chartered Engineers in the UK, I understand 
that title is reserved for members of the 
Institute of Chartered Engineers which I believe 
is a voluntary organization.  I don't think you 
have to be a member of any organization in order 
to practise engineering in the UK.  This is 
strictly my understanding of what a Brit told me, 
so I would like to hear from over there.
Gary


On 5 Mar 2005 at 11:35, Bill Polhemus wrote:

> Gary Hodgson & Associates wrote:
> 
> >If you want to see how you can operate without a state
> >board, look at Canada.  All the provinces have self-
> >governing professional boards or associations and
> >operate reasonably well--sure, there is room for improve-
> >ment, but that is true in any case.  I understand that
> >Great Britain does not have professional licensing. Is
> >that true, how does it work and what do other countries
> >do?
> >  
> >
> So what do the terms P.Eng. (Canada) and "Chartered Engineer" (UK) 
> signify? I asssume it has to do with the "professional associations" and 
> their rules by which they bestow these distinctions, but I'm wondering 
> how they compare to the state board requirements.
> 
> 
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   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 
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.1 - Release Date: 2/27/2005
> 




-- 
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.5.1 - Release Date: 2/27/2005


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********