Arizona Man Sues State Agency Over Right To Call Himself an Engineer (ieee.org) 210
McGruber quotes IEEE Spectrum: Greg Mills, co-owner of Southwest Engineering Concepts, is suing the state of Arizona's technical registration board to protest being fined for working without an engineering license, which Mills maintains he doesn't need because it doesn't pertain to the type of work he performs.
It's the latest case pitting engineers against state licensing agencies that by some accounts have become more aggressive in attempting to regulate who can call themselves an engineer, even as the use of that term becomes more widespread. Meanwhile, licensing proponents maintain it's necessary for the public interest and point out that Arizona statutes have clear definitions of what an engineer is...
The central issue is Mills' right to call himself an engineer despite not being a state-licensed professional engineer. Mills, an IEEE Member, has worked as an engineer for three decades, at first for aerospace and tech companies. For the last 10 years, he and his wife have co-owned a three-person engineering consulting firm that makes electronics prototypes and other equipment for startups and small and mid-sized companies that can't afford to hire in-house engineering staff...
Mills is represented by the same public interest law firm that helped an Oregon engineer win a similar suit against that stateâ(TM)s engineering licensing agency.
It's the latest case pitting engineers against state licensing agencies that by some accounts have become more aggressive in attempting to regulate who can call themselves an engineer, even as the use of that term becomes more widespread. Meanwhile, licensing proponents maintain it's necessary for the public interest and point out that Arizona statutes have clear definitions of what an engineer is...
The central issue is Mills' right to call himself an engineer despite not being a state-licensed professional engineer. Mills, an IEEE Member, has worked as an engineer for three decades, at first for aerospace and tech companies. For the last 10 years, he and his wife have co-owned a three-person engineering consulting firm that makes electronics prototypes and other equipment for startups and small and mid-sized companies that can't afford to hire in-house engineering staff...
Mills is represented by the same public interest law firm that helped an Oregon engineer win a similar suit against that stateâ(TM)s engineering licensing agency.
Ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
If he called himself a "civil engineer", AKA, a guy who builds bridges and highways, then, they might have a point. Otherwise, these civil engineers who come up with "licensing" scheme should try to pass a test on how to do *my* engineering job.
BTW, anyone who does most other types of engineering can read up and pass the "certified engineer" test with minimal study - it's not that hard compared to what they are doing otherwise.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Hey.......if Bruce Jenner can call himself a woman why can't this guy call himself an engineer? Makes as much sense.
Re: (Score:3)
Used to work in the second good-sized concentration of aerospace engineers in my city. One day we got a letter from the state engineering society very much as described above...we replied "Please send 400 application forms, a copy of the sample test, and the date of your next officer election." Never heard from them again.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there is a certain truth to that, but, restricting the use of the word to mean only one, very narrow, definition, enforced by law, isn't a good solution.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, there is a certain truth to that, but, restricting the use of the word to mean only one, very narrow, definition, enforced by law, isn't a good solution.
Ultimately, narrower definitions suit the pseudo-governmental organizations charged with oversight for the public good. They begin with the best of intentions, yet sometimes devolve into little governing baronies.
This smells a bit like unions being originally formed to prevent worker abuses, and then devolving into organizations that unilaterally control worker supply and encourage mediocrity.
Re: (Score:3)
They begin with the best of intentions, yet always devolve into little governing baronies.
FTFY
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Rather, it shoud be restored to mean what it was intended to mean again.
Originally an engineer was a train driver or a person who maintained a stationary engine. None of the were certified. Some of the modern certified engineers maintain the tradition of "people that could kill you if they did their job wrong" but that's a small fraction. Most modern certified engineers are actually usurpers.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:The term already bein so abused does not justif (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, but the term engineer dates back to the 14th century, used to refer to persons who built military engines and structures - it became used in the civil sense in 1750, when John Smeaton used it to differentiate engineers working on civilian projects from those working on military ones.
Stationary steam engine operators were originally called stationary engineers.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's not the original meaning. The original name showed up before there were licenses.
Re: (Score:2)
Rather, it shoud be restored to mean what it was intended to mean again.
Someone who designs, repairs, and/or operates a machine?
Re: Ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
The state can have the term 'licensed engineer'. I have a Masters of Electrical Engineering from a very respected university and will continue to call myself an engineer because that is what I am.
There is no reason they need to drop the word licensed. The public is not confused.
Re: Ridiculous (Score:5, Informative)
Exactly this. The state is the one that created confusion by using a word that was already in common use (and with more than one meaning at that). It's up to them to add a modifier to make a more specific term. They should probably just use PE since that is fairly commonly understood already as the person that must be licensed, carry professional insurance, and is permitted to sign off on a civil engineering project.
Re: Ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
Bollocks. Doctors have fancy degrees, yet are required to become licensed. People who claim a certain title without getting the appropriate licensing/certification want the power/respect etc due the title, but none of its responsibilities.
And yet, anyone with a doctorate can call him/herself a doctor, and most of them do so as a general matter of course. Maybe you should have chosen a better example.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Bollocks. Doctors have fancy degrees, yet are required to become licensed.
What are you talking about? You don't need any license to spend 8 years at school.
There's no such thing as a license required to be a teacher. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Philosophy [wikipedia.org]
You don't need a license to play music either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Musical_Arts [wikipedia.org]
You don't need a license to read the bible and discuss it either. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Practical_Theology [wikipedia.org]
Yet there are types of educational doctorate degrees you can get that DO require a license
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
People who claim to own certain fields and charge a fee for entry are scummy bottom feeders.
"Engineer" and "WA State licensed professional engineer" are two very different things.
Engineers solve problems.
Spin up a "licensing board of your own" and fine them right back.
They had better not offer medical services (Score:5, Informative)
Anyone can call themselves "doctor", true.
As I recall, "the Reverend" Jessie Jackson started using that title when he was 12 or 13 years old.
If people offer medical services while calling themselves "Dr Bernstein", they are going to jail if they aren't licensed.
This guy is advertising engineering services, using the regulated title "engineer" for those services. That's what is illegal. One may think the law should be changed, but that's the law.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah his court case is based on him claiming that he's not offering engineering work - through his company, Southwest Engineering, while advertising himself as an engineer. Oh, but I'm not acting like I'm engineering anything, he says, and nobody would mistake me for an engineer.
I think his case sucks.
Ten years ago, before there was a path for software engineers to get credentialed, the right "software engineer" might have had a better case.
Re: Ridiculous (Score:5, Insightful)
Licensing is yet another control and tax/fee mechanism of the state that also protects incumbents against competition, thereby making an economy less efficient. It would not exist in a free, voluntaryist society.
Believe whatever you like about protecting "the public" though.
Uh huh. And who would you go to if you needed a liver transplant or a root canal? A self-proclaimed practitioner in a "free, voluntaryist society?"
Like it or not, we allow ourselves to be governed because a government helps to protect us. And that includes providing an imprimatur to practitoners who could do us harm if they are unqualified. It is reckless and naïve to expect a laissez-faire society to sort out such practitioners through the force of the market. Let anyone call themselves a surgeon and let the ones who don't kill their patients be recognized as competent? No thanks.
Go to the one with the best yelp rating (Score:3)
Computer programmers... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the jurisdiction and the company.
I know that in the past IBM worked with professional engineering organizations to allow them to call their technicians "Service Engineers". I believe they did that with some programmers as well.
Re: (Score:2)
...even when at the level of being leisurely dabblers, often refer to themselves as "engineers" and "architects" these days. What does this regulation have to say about this?
More to the point, the companies for whom I've worked have labeled the positions, "Software Engineer". I have a degree (BS) in CS, not in Engineering, like my co-workers did/do.
Re: (Score:3)
I've long ago stopped calling myself a "software engineer", as I realized it was meaningless ego-stroking by our profession. "Software architect" sounds even more ridiculous to me. I'm a "computer programmer" now, and happy with that term.
Re: (Score:2)
"Software architect" sounds even more ridiculous to me."
As would a "concrete architect"...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I bet you drink lattes as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Computer programmers with the proper education (at least a BA in CS or Software Engineering) are engineers. Below that level, they are "technicians". (Yes, I know that a lot of people will not want to hear that. The truth hurts.)
Law is advertising to the public. Building code (Score:3)
The law is about advertising your services to the public using certain titles. For example, building codes require that if you want an exception to certain codes, you want to build it differently than speced by the code, your plan needs to be signed off by an engineer. When I bought my first house, I was concerned about the foundation so I hired an engineer to analyze it.
Within a company, you and your co-workers can call yourself fire hydrants if you want, nobody cares. Maybe working with one guy is like
Hypocrisy, thy name is Greg Mills (Score:3, Insightful)
So you want to be called an engineer without having a license - in your legal battle are you employing individuals who are not licensed lawyers but call themselves lawyers because they have worked in a legal capacity for a number of decades?
Re: (Score:2)
I've been called an engineer all my life, and sign off legal requirements. No PE involved.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been called an engineer all my life, and sign off legal requirements.
Congratulations? That puts you in two categories: a) you're not legally required to be a PE where you work, or b) you're breaking the law. I hope it's the former, because the latter can get you blacklisted from being a PE in the future if you need to be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know full well he isn't, because it's illegal to give tailored legal advice, portraying yourself as an expert in legal matters, without having a law licence.
If such a person did exist, I personally would be more than happy to have them represent me over a licensed lawyer who had a far worse record of winning cases, other things equal.
But that's not a relevant analogy to the case at hand. You seem to be implying that he isn't qualified to do the work he's doing. No one disputes that he's qualified to do
Re: (Score:2)
No, he wants to be called an electrical and electronics engineer, which he definitely is. The State licensing board didn't invent that term. It can't just co-opt it for its own industry. Plus, it's not like clients are going to accidentally seek his help to build a bridge or build a water treatment plant.
Re: (Score:3)
Certain engineering fields (typically civil, structural, and sometimes mechanical) require Professional Engineer certification to get a job (it's just a test you take after you graduate, to verify that you actually learned what you were supposed to learn in engineering school). These are
"Engineer" - one who operates and engine (Score:2)
"Electrical Engineer", "Petroleum Engineer", "Civil Engineer", "Mechanical Engineer" are registered trademarks by IEEE, SPE, ASCE, and ASME, respectively. "An engineer" should not be protected, and in fact, isn't, in most places (pretty much nowhere, outside the US). Though the professional organizations have gone Nazi on the term, especially in technical fields,
Re: "Engineer" - one who operates and engine (Score:2)
Except that's not how the law works, stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
[citation needed]
Seriously, take a moment to explain why the other person is wrong. Your comment makes you look like the dumb one in that exchange.
Re: "Engineer" - one who operates and engine (Score:2)
Citation: Your state's engineering code.
"Engineer" is a legally defined term not a trademark.
Re: (Score:2)
Also note the article is on the IEEE websi
Re: "Engineer" - one who operates and engine (Score:2)
The IEEE has exactly what interest in keeping the word illegal? That seems to be pretty unlikely.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Virginia, there is a statute that defines "professional engineer" -- and that definition is, again by statute, limited to people who are licensed by the relevant guild/union (called the "Board" in that statute). The same part of the statutes prescribes serious civil and criminal penalties for unauthorized commercial use of the word "engineering" or its morphological forms. Is your argument that it is even more strongly protected by law than a trademark is? Or are you quibbling over word choice ra
Re: "Engineer" - one who operates and engine (Score:2)
My argument is that it's completely different. It's not a trademark. It's a law.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a frivolous argument. Trademarks are created and defined by law.
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, take a moment to explain why the other person is wrong. Your comment makes you look like the dumb one in that exchange.
He already did. The matter here is legal. It's not trademark. It's not a dictionary definition. It's legal. Anything you think is relevant outside of what is written in the law of the state isn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, anyone with driver's license should be able to call themselves an "engineer".
Sure, just show me where that definition is codified in Arizona's law and you'll have a point. Until then, a pedant who things the dictionary will help them making their case in front of a judge is a true idiot.
Australian PE & prescriptive standards (Score:2)
We recently had a robust internal debate about this.
The key is "Professional Engineer" not just Engineer. It has a specific legal meaning and our state legislation limits the requirement for board registration of a PE for tasks that involve safeguarding life, health or property
Thus you can be an engineer who writes banking code, or flashes pretty lights and not require board registration. If you design a bridge, a lift, a ventilator, you need a PE involved.
There is also one other exception. If what you are
Re: (Score:2)
The truth (Score:3)
Yesterday I couldn't even spell injuneer and now I are one! :-)
here's the reason for licensing (Score:2)
OK, you 'engineers' are too close to see the forest for the trees here. Licensing is widespread and not limited to engineers.
In my state you need a license to give a haircut. Or a manicure. Or shave a bush or insert nipple studs. You have to undergo millions of hours of really tedious training and then pass tests that would drive you insane.
Why?
Obviously, when you perform such an intensely personal service, sanitation and health are a concern. (That's what they'll tell you) In reality, it's the industry, no
Re: (Score:2)
Nobody here is contesting that some tasks that fall under the umbrella of engineering requires a license. But many other things do not (the law agrees on that). the correct term for an engineer that carries such a license is Licensed Professional Engineer or PE.
It hurts engineering pay scales (Score:2)
Beauticians, barbers, manicurists, hair stylists also want to be licensed and regulated.
AMA maintains a strict scarcity of doctors. And it is not easy to fake your credentials. Of course if you are really a big shot, like son of a congressman, married to a heiress, your father-in-law might create a board to cer
Do you know who ... (Score:2)
If you want more MCAS, this is how you get it.
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit - by the same token, every *successful* product is also built by "non-licensed" engineers.
Re: (Score:2)
But nobody is going to complain if their XBox dies. It isn't going to take 150 people with it.
Re: (Score:2)
I meant life-critical systems - like defense applications, most power plant equipment, and every airplane you have ever flown in.
Re: (Score:2)
"Engineer", like "scientist" or "accountant"... (Score:2)
These terms are too non-specific. Being an "engineer" is not sufficiently specified to be allow to design a bridge, or a commercial airplane, etc. Just like "scientist" or "accountant" or even "doctor" (MD? PhD? OD? PsyD? DSc? etc"). Therefore a licensing jurisdiction/agency, which of course is necessary, should not be hingeing certification on the title "engineer". Go certify "electric engineers', "mechanical engineers", "chemical engineers", just like there are CPA's.
This is silly (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
No one can take my doctorate away.
Say the N word on Twitter and @mention the university which conferred the degree upon you.
Re: (Score:2)
yes they can.
when you retire you turn in your degree, from what i understand.
i know that's not exactly what you are talking about, but *technically*, they can.
We've fought this battle for over 40 years. (Score:2)
We've been fighting this battle for well over 40 years. The first one I recall, had we lost it, would mean any computer programmer who had the necessary certifications to practice the trade for money, would have to be an expert in Cobol and JCL.
Think where the industry would be if Kernighan, Ritchie, Thompson,
1. Professional level computer programming (aka "software engineering") IS an engineering discipline.
2. But the tools and techniques change so quickly that a government operated professional certifi
Re: (Score:2)
would mean any computer programmer who had the necessary certifications to practice the trade for money, would have to be an expert in Cobol and JCL.
Eh, better that then Java.
Arizona "engineer" (Score:2)
IEEE Member (Score:2)
an IEEE Member
So the guy pays dues to get the "Spectrum" magazine mailed to him and dumped in the trash? That should be justification enough to make sure he doesn't do any work on anything important.
Rqmts for calling myself a "public servant"? (Score:2)
anything else legally reserved in Arizona? (Score:2)
engineer - check
doctor?
instructor?
teacher?
preacher?
scientist?
secretary?
farmer?
ranger?
cashier?
absurdity (Score:2)
https://guff.com/10-of-the-mos... [guff.com]
Re:Mills should just get his license (Score:5, Informative)
The application you linked is the application for the "fundamentals" exam, which is only the first step in becoming a licensed professional engineer. If you pass that exam, you qualify only as an "in-training" engineer, according to Arizona Revised Statutes section 32-122.
As I understand it, the guild that runs the professional engineering exam requires prospective engineers to be mentored by a licensed PE before they can take the second exam.
Re:Mills should just get his license (Score:5, Insightful)
Bullcrap. So, what, my two university degrees don't count now? That's a crock of sh*t. Have you seen what's on the exam? (Hint: nobody has because exams from previous years aren't made public). It's even more bullsh*t because they want to try to license software engineers too not just civil engineers and make you take a test. Really? Which language? And so the hell what? The very nature of requiring you to take a test violates a fundamental rule of engineering: never memorize anything. Always look it up in a handbook.
Re: Mills should just get his license (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
No one is suggesting that people be allowed to build bridges without being a licensed engineer.
A license is required to practice medicine, and that's fine. But people with doctorates in medicine that lack a license to practice medicine are still called "doctors".
A license is required to practice structural engineering, and that's fine. But people who engineer other things can't be called engineers"?
If being called an "engineer" was a problem, so to would be different types of engineering licenses sharing
Re: (Score:3)
No, unless the licensed civil engineer is found guilty of misconduct or gross negligence, they won't go to jail, though they will be held civilly liable and might lose their license. At least not in most places. (I understand from my boss that in the old Soviet Union, they would be thrown in jail.)
Fail (Score:5, Insightful)
The usual problem with mechanical and electrical engineers is that they can't claim to have worked under the supervision of PEs for 4 years. For instance I have never met a PE at work.
Re: (Score:3)
Everywhere I've worked, the hardware, electrical, and mechanical engineers generally don't have licenses. There are only a couple in each company needed, and only in rare circumstances. Yet everyone's called an engineer. It'd be weird to take a job as an Electrical Wannabe Engineer.
Re: (Score:2)
Yet everyone's called an engineer. It'd be weird to take a job as an Electrical Wannabe Engineer.
I find this strange too. It's one thing to call yourself something. It's quite another to sign documents in a legal capacity. In my country you can call yourself an engineer if you want no problem. Just don't ever sign off a document as a "Professional Engineer" without being a registered PE.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And 90% of the time, it's the company you work for that keeps calling you an engineer, or has engineer in your title. Do these states want to sue companies so that everyone's called "staff"?
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need to be an engineer to work as an engineer, you just must be a licensed member of The Guild to call yourself one in public when trying to get work. And you have to be one to sign work as
Re: (Score:2)
I know it's very common in planning and civil engineering.
Re:Fail (Score:5, Informative)
Supervision under a PE is not a requirement, at least in all the states I know of. If you don't have that supervision, then some minimum number of years experience in engineering within your general license of interest is required. And, in any event, you need letters of recommendation from something like 3 to 5 supervisors or PEs (PEs can be in any discipline) as to your character (whatever that is) and that you took on and managed tasks of increasing levels of responsibility and capability. The PE process is now pretty much harmonized across the US. The outlier I know of is California, where to get my license there I had to show them (via NCEES, the national organization that manages the testing and record-keeping) my Arizona PE and take a California-specific (but really, it should be a national requirement) 25-question ethics and rules exam, the 25 questions for which are all on-line and, with a few hours of review of the rules and applicable law, is a breeze to pass.
I graduated with a BSE from an accredited US university. I then worked over a decade building and being the responsible ("Cognizant Engineer" was the official title) for a bunch of space-flight electronics subsystems until it was time to get an MSEE (from another appropriately accredited US school). After nearly 20 years in space flight, I switched industries, went into semiconductor systems design, and continued to work as an "engineer" and manager for very complex commercial RF and analog ICs. After over a decade doing that, got bored, decided to get into the infrastructure world, saw that all the engineers around me were PE or PEng (in Canada). Here in AZ, after nearly three decades since the BSE, I took the PE electrical engineering exam. Passed that, and now I R 1 2.
For the EE exam, it was officially called the Electronics and Computer Engineering exam (or similar). Multiple choice, 80(?) questions, 40 in the 4-hour morning session, then the remainder in the afternoon 4-hour session. I had to show that I knew engineering school basic math (no calculus!), V=IR kind of electrical, AC and DC basics, Boolean algebra, engineering econ and benefit/cost analysis, that kind of stuff. No ethics or morals questions. The one question that almost threw me was the very last one, regarding, of all things, channel capacity in Erlangs!
In my current role, I am the "Engineer Of Record" for the communications systems of a number of large PPP, public, and private infrastructure projects where many engineers and "designers" (folks with no degree, techs, non-engineering-degreed, who do engineering design) do designs; my stamp is the one that goes on the finished drawings. I have to make sure that I know the basics of all the different electrical and electronic disciplines that are doing that work, which makes it fun especially as I get to learn how all the other bits work.
Naturally, if/when shit happens, my name will be the first that they look for. But I'm good with that, as every design I review means that I've spent a fair amount of time and effort attempting to understand a design and ensure that those who did the work can explain to me their design, and answer any/all questions I might have. Some can't, or don't want to, and those designs sit there until the design gets fixed or they give me sufficient explanation so that I understand the fundamentals of what they did. In the current company, over a third(?) of the workforce is licensed, mostly civils, a significant minority of structurals, lots of licensed architects of various disciplines, and all the support staff. Honestly, after working with some really good civil and structural engineers, I'm more impressed than ever by bridges and giant structures, and the materials engineering that's been done to make concrete and steel do things that wouldn't have been possible even 20 years ago.
All in all, the PE has been a good path forward, forced me to relearn some stuff that has since become handy again, and now appreciate greatly the work of YouTube creators like Khan Academy, 3Blue1Brown, and a bunch more. Financially, it paid off as well.
YMMV.
Re: (Score:2)
Speaking from experience, this is an excellent and correct post.
Re:Look! I'm a Prof. Dr. med. now! (Score:5, Insightful)
Moronic comment.
Lots of people call themselves "Doctor" that you would not want medical treatment from. In fact, medical doctors adopted the term long after its earlier use to denote someone who holds a doctoral degree.
Re: (Score:2)
That "older" use is still the current one in most of the world. And no, you definitely do not want medical treatment from me ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
ORLY? Try saying that without injecting political bias. But I digress. So what if you passed a test on a given day? That doesn't mean you won't f*ck up the aforementioned water treatment plant or bridge later. What if the test didn't cover the stuff you use regularly?
Re: Licenses are necessary to protect the public (Score:2)
Oh, professional engineer screw things up all the time. But when they do there is a process of regulations and accountability.
I know accountability is a word most people like you don't understand, but it is necessary when we are taking about people's lives.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, professional engineer screw things up all the time. But when they do there is a process of regulations and accountability.
I know accountability is a word most people like you don't understand, but it is necessary when we are taking about people's lives.
So who has been executed or sentenced to life in jail for rigging the VW diesels?
Or for making the planes nose dive when a single sensor failed?
Or for Toyotas getting stuck on full throttle? Or for LYING about Toyotas getting stuck on full throttle, blaming the floor mats, when they KNEW it was a control system bug?
Name one person who was held accountable.
Re: (Score:2)
ha ha ha. It's funny until it's the bridge YOU are driving over.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Licenses are necessary to protect the public (Score:2)
It okay for people that work hard to earn prestigious titles and earn the public trust to do important work that everyone relies on.
Just because you didn't work hard doesn't mean other people didn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Engineer is a fairly old term that has drifted over the centuries. Literally it means people who design, maintain, and operate engines. But note that is engine in the archaic sense. For example, catapults were examples of a war engine.
Continuing down the centuries, the thing that pulls a train is an engine and the person who maintains and operates it is an Engineer. For example, Casey Jones [wikipedia.org].
It is perfectly reasonable and correct to call James Watt an engineer, in spite of him never being licensed in the sta
Re:Licenses are necessary to protect the public (Score:4, Informative)
Thus the typical "PE" after a person, indicating a Professional Engineer - someone with a Government-issued license such that they can sign off on official plans that must be licensed/permitted by the Government. All other engineers (including myself) just call ourselves engineers - in my case, an electrical engineer by training (EE) and an acoustics engineer by vocation (AE).
I will give you PE - Professional Engineer. You don't get to claim the word "engineer" as your exclusive honorific, though...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And, in most states, if you are employed by a company that makes circuit boards, you can call yourself an engineer. But you cannot call your company an engineering company. Because "Engineer" and "Engineering" are legally defined terms by your state's engineering code.
Re: (Score:2)
What's important is for people to not call themselves Licensed Professional Engineers unless they are licensed. There are many other engineers out there. As long as they don't fraudulently sign off on a project that requires the sign-off of a Licensed Professional Engineer, all is well.
Re: (Score:2)
We can't just let any conservative a-hole design a water treatment plants and bridges.
Just google his name. It's crystal clear that he only means electrical and electronic engineering, not civil/structural engineering. What's next? Apple suing an apple-cart stand for using the word "apple" because it's too afraid that the apple-cart owner could turn around and start selling iPhone and Macbook knock offs?
Context matters. For instance, if tomorrow, you forbade "Dr. Phil" from using the term Doctor, because he only has a doctorate degree but he's not a licensed psychologist. I would have no pro
Re: (Score:2)