Oregon Man Temporarily Wins the Right to Call Himself an "Engineer"

shspvr

Gawd
Joined
Nov 22, 2009
Messages
735
If you don't have the degree, and aren't certified by the state, you're about as much an engineer as someone who pretends to be a doctor.

And yes there are certification boards for each state that administer test.

If you are applying for jobs implying something you aren't, you should be BARRED from all future employment activities.
You don't need degree in fact if look back in to history it may just shock to know that at lease 70% of people are just college dropout.
A doctor is a diff ball of wax.
 

STR

Gawd
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Messages
540
I'm cool with this law as long as I never have to call anyone doctor again without some sort of medical degree.

A doctor of philosophy or religious studies? Gag.

I once took a course lead by a Philosophy Ph.D. His concentration was in logic and he worked at Intel during the day. Still gagging?

I wouldnt call a pharmacist a doctor anyway, just saying.

Some of them are. It's a Pharm.D., not a Ph.D.

Now, I wouldn't call a lawyer a doctor, even though that's what the J.D. stands for.
 
Last edited:

cyclone3d

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
14,836
Dude, I used dandelions when I was a kid to cure warts I had on my finger, some hippy as shit teacher I had told me to pick a dandelion with its stem and at the bottom of the stem their is white liquid, everyday put the white liquid on the warts and its a painless wart cure.

No shit, I had been to doctors who burned the fuckers off and they still came back, one week of dandelion juice and the shits be gone for ever, rocking 30 years later and still no sign of them, shit works.

There are a massive number of remedies that work way better than the crap that is called medicine.

Cellulitis - use diluted oregano essential oil and it is completely gone in 2 days.

Go to the doctor and they give you an antibiotic that wipes out all the good bacteria as well and it takes a good week to get rid of it.

I can go as far as to say that I really have no need of antibiotics anymore. Essential oils kill off the bad bacteria a lot faster AND they don't wipe out the good bacteria either.

And instead of getting moles removed by whatever crappy methods... freezing, cutting out, etc which leaves scars, you can just use apple cider vinegar on a cotton swab under a band-aid for a few nights after poking the mole in multiple places with a needle. The mole dries up and falls off by itself, doesn't come back, and doesn't leave a scar.

So many natural cures out there and most doctors have no clue about them and refuse to believe they work.... probably because if everybody knew about real natural cures the doctors would be out of a job for the most part.
 

alxlwson

You Know Where I Live
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
8,381
There are a massive number of remedies that work way better than the crap that is called medicine.

Cellulitis - use diluted oregano essential oil and it is completely gone in 2 days.

Go to the doctor and they give you an antibiotic that wipes out all the good bacteria as well and it takes a good week to get rid of it.

I can go as far as to say that I really have no need of antibiotics anymore. Essential oils kill off the bad bacteria a lot faster AND they don't wipe out the good bacteria either.

And instead of getting moles removed by whatever crappy methods... freezing, cutting out, etc which leaves scars, you can just use apple cider vinegar on a cotton swab under a band-aid for a few nights after poking the mole in multiple places with a needle. The mole dries up and falls off by itself, doesn't come back, and doesn't leave a scar.

So many natural cures out there and most doctors have no clue about them and refuse to believe they work.... probably because if everybody knew about real natural cures the doctors would be out of a job for the most part.


I had a buddy at work tell me that some old farmer rubbed a potato on his wart, then buried the potato. As the potato grew, the wart disappeared. Sounds like magic to me, like apple cider vinegar.
 

cyclone3d

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
14,836
You don't need degree in fact if look back in to history it may just shock to know that at lease 70% of people are just college dropout.
A doctor is a diff ball of wax.

I completely understand why they dropped out.. even back then. I, for one cannot stand book-work or most classes. Some of the greatest minds did not even finish grade school/flunked out because it bored them to death.

In grade school I spent more time drawing and not doing my work in class than anything else. So hard to keep focused on boring book work.. and always finding errors in the school books didn't help.

In college I fell asleep in almost every single class. The only ones I could stay awake for all the time were art and accounting and some other classes with outstanding teachers that I actually found interesting.

History, math, programming, etc I could absolutely not keep my eyes open for the most part.. no matter how hard I tried.

I did get my degree in software engineering though as I had started and wanted to finish.
 

cyclone3d

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Aug 16, 2004
Messages
14,836
I had a buddy at work tell me that some old farmer rubbed a potato on his wart, then buried the potato. As the potato grew, the wart disappeared. Sounds like magic to me, like apple cider vinegar.

I hope you are being sarcastic.

I am only citing remedies I have seen work first hand and/or had work on me personally.
 

Grahamkracka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
1,052
if you can't solve a differential, or understand finite element analysis using differentials, or solve a double pendulum problem, or solve a constant heat flow problem to boil a liquid under constant pressure using Boyles laws and specific heat energies, then you aren't an engineer. I'm sorry to burst your bubble.
To be fair, none of these things MAKE you an engineer either. I know many wannabe AEs that knew all the basics like this but were incapable of abstract thinking. They didn't last long in the aerospace industry.
 

alxlwson

You Know Where I Live
Joined
Aug 25, 2013
Messages
8,381
I hope you are being sarcastic.

I am only citing remedies I have seen work first hand and/or had work on me personally.

I'm actually being serious. This dude swore on his mother's life that the guy and his tater destroyed his wart
 

mdburkey

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 19, 2007
Messages
498
Honestly, almost none of the engineers I work with bother to pay any licensing fees to be "professional engineers" and probably less than half ever took the PE exam after college -- by most, it was generally looked upon as a "why bother".

I've worked as a software engineer for over 25 years and have done no small amount of electrical engineering work in that time too (as most of my software engineering is in the deep embedded realm and I'm who usually has to debug/fix the schematics for the hardware I'm trying to bring up, do the pin assignments, verify all the pull up voltages, etc). I've worked as an independent contractor for over 15 years and before that my job title ranged from Senior, to Staff, to Principle Design Engineer. That said, I never took the PE and only completed 3 years of EE (plus a minor in CS and another, non-technical, major). To date this has had zero impact on my career. Additionally, some of the actual "Professional Engineers" I have worked with in years past (one in particular) couldn't engineer crap and I was the one who usually had to fix what they FUBAR'ed (e.g. having two driven outputs tied together without a resistor, etc).

Personally, having known and worked with people both with and without PE licenses, I can pretty confidently state that the license doesn't mean jack when it comes to being an indicator of ability or competence.
 
Last edited:

krotch

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 12, 2004
Messages
4,509
My state doesn't have certified engineers for IT disciplines. So even if you wanted to get certified, you have no way of actually doing it.
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
True, but charging him a fine

Law trumps context. If you refuse to obey the Cease and Desist or engage in a practice which harms the public while calling yourself a member of a protected or regulated class, then there are consequences. If the law prescribes a fine, then it can be levied and enforced by a court order. And the law applies to all of us.

As for the consequence of representing yourself as a member of a regulated profession or class, a Professional Engineer in Ontario was stripped of his designation and charged with criminal negligence in the collapse of an Ontario shopping centre. He was found not guilty at trial yesterday.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...ence-in-deadly-elliot-lake-mall-collapse.html
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
Personally, having known and worked with people both with and without PE licenses, I can pretty confidently state that the license doesn't mean jack when it comes to being an indicator of ability or competence.

There is always the top and bottom of a graduating class. But to have the professional designation, if available to you, means that you practice your discipline according to certain professional standards, are accountable for your professional actions and usually are backed by liability insurance for malpractice. It also means that the public is protected from malpractice.
 

Darunion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
4,400
Law trumps context. If you refuse to obey the Cease and Desist or engage in a practice which harms the public while calling yourself a member of a protected or regulated class, then there are consequences. If the law prescribes a fine, then it can be levied and enforced by a court order. And the law applies to all of us.

As for the consequence of representing yourself as a member of a regulated profession or class, a Professional Engineer in Ontario was stripped of his designation and charged with criminal negligence in the collapse of an Ontario shopping centre. He was found not guilty at trial yesterday.

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/20...ence-in-deadly-elliot-lake-mall-collapse.html

That doesnt make it right. That is why it is under review at the moment to decide if they were acting lawfully or not. This was more of a case of misdirection (you point out something I do wrong and in return i bring attention to something you did wrong instead),

The word engineer at this point is too broad and if it is going to be properly regulated, will have to be lengthened ie State Certified Engineer of XXXX. After all, engineers also drive trains
 

Mohonri

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
5,757
I have never once shoved my credentials in anyone's face. I only bring it up when the conversation is engineering related. You are the one who is blowing himself up to be something you aren't. And if your company screws up, you will find your butt out the door when they get in trouble for assigning someone who doesn't have the proper credentials and titling them an engineer.

Maybe you're just insecure. You can be proud of the work you did. But it doesn't make you engineer till you get the paper or cert. Take the state boards. It should be no big deal for you, if you are as good as you say you are.

These are the list of classes just about ALL engineers take:

Drafting/CAD/CAM
Fluid dynamics
statics
Mechanics
Dynamics
Calculus 1, 2, 3
Differentials
Statistics
Thermodynamics
Kinematic Physics
Electrical Engineering and mesh circuit analysis

if you can't solve a differential, or understand finite element analysis using differentials, or solve a double pendulum problem, or solve a constant heat flow problem to boil a liquid under constant pressure using Boyles laws and specific heat energies, then you aren't an engineer. I'm sorry to burst your bubble.
Ahem. That list looks looks awful specific to a single discipline--mechanical engineering. Electrical engineers (of which I am one, though I'm not a PE) don't generally take fluid dynamics, mechanics, dynamics, or thermodynamics, and my program (which is accredited and widely respected) only touched on CAD (only used in the context of circuit design/analysis). I wouldn't expect an chemical engineer to understand FEA any more than I would expect an ME to take a class in lines & fields.

Yes, I agree that the tern "engineer" has ballooned far beyond its original definition, and lots of professions are described as engineering when they have little relation to engineering in its traditional meaning. But it's silly for a state to declare a monopoly on the term Engineer and declare that a person is not an engineer just because they haven't taken a specific exam. Sure, we can agree that there is value in having a certification process whereby engineers can prove their capabilities. But that creates a title of State Certified Engineeer or Professional Engineer. Not an Engineer.

Also, state licensing/certification in many cases *is* very much a case of rent-seeking. For example, some states require that not only do you pass the exam, you also have to spend a number of years as an "Engineer in training," regardless of your work history/experience. And that requires working under an existing PE for a number of years. So if you've been doing engineering work for 20 years and are eminently capable, but haven't gone through the PE process, you still have to wait several years, even though that requirement does nothing in itself to qualify you as an engineer.
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
That doesnt make it right. That is why it is under review at the moment to decide if they were acting lawfully or not. This was more of a case of misdirection (you point out something I do wrong and in return i bring attention to something you did wrong instead),

The word engineer at this point is too broad and if it is going to be properly regulated, will have to be lengthened ie State Certified Engineer of XXXX. After all, engineers also drive trains

Sorry, that's nonsense. If it is a regulated profession, then that is a legal term and it would take either a court decision or a new act of the state legislature to change it. No decision has been reached. I suggest, however, that the term "engineer" is not too broad a term and the regulatory authority was entirely correct and with it's statutory responsibility to draw attention to the gentleman's error. Going forward, there is certainly a compelling public interest case for the restriction.
 

NickJames

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
6,686
Sorry, that's nonsense. If it is a regulated profession, then that is a legal term and it would take either a court decision or a new act of the state legislature to change it. No decision has been reached. I suggest, however, that the term "engineer" is not too broad a term and the regulatory authority was entirely correct and with it's statutory responsibility to draw attention to the gentleman's error. Going forward, there is certainly a compelling public interest case for the restriction.

It is a broad term. There's like 30 different professions receiving of the title "engineer" and hundreds in certifications.
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
But it's silly for a state to declare a monopoly on the term Engineer and declare that a person is not an engineer just because they haven't taken a specific exam.

No, it is more that they have not met a certain standard and are subject, going forward, to a certain level of competence and accountability. In this province the regulated colleges not only assess their vocations initially but also in an ongoing manner to ensure that not only are standards met initially, but that the public interest is protected by ensuring ongoing standards compliance.


Sure, we can agree that there is value in having a certification process whereby engineers can prove their capabilities. But that creates a title of State Certified Engineeer or Professional Engineer. Not an Engineer.

Much depends on how the law is written.

Also, state licensing/certification in many cases *is* very much a case of rent-seeking. For example, some states require that not only do you pass the exam, you also have to spend a number of years as an "Engineer in training," regardless of your work history/experience. And that requires working under an existing PE for a number of years. So if you've been doing engineering work for 20 years and are eminently capable, but haven't gone through the PE process, you still have to wait several years, even though that requirement does nothing in itself to qualify you as an engineer.

Really? Are you a member of a regulated profession? Do you know why there are levels of competence and number of work hours required? You don't learn everything in a college, university or trade school. My son is a professional chef (that's a regulated trade here). He not only had to take certain courses, he also had to have 5,000 hours of experience under a journeyman chef and then write an exam. Now he is himself a journeyman chef (the technical certification is "Red Seal"). The principle is the same for Professional Engineers and any other regulated profession. If you have worked previously, the 5,000 hour qualification can be assessed and equivalency granted.
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
It is a broad term. There's like 30 different professions receiving of the title "engineer" and hundreds in certifications.

In law, it is not. Law trumps custom every time. If it's an issue, look at changing the law.
 

Darunion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
4,400
Sorry, that's nonsense. If it is a regulated profession, then that is a legal term and it would take either a court decision or a new act of the state legislature to change it. No decision has been reached. I suggest, however, that the term "engineer" is not too broad a term and the regulatory authority was entirely correct and with it's statutory responsibility to draw attention to the gentleman's error. Going forward, there is certainly a compelling public interest case for the restriction.

Well apparently a federal judge in Oregon does not agree with you and that is why for the time being he is still allowed to call himself an engineer. As it should be in my opinion.

In law, it is not. Law trumps custom every time. If it's an issue, look at changing the law.

That is what could come out of this, people like the guy in the article making a movement although I am sure he did not expect this.
 

dethklokworkorange

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
176
State run professional licenses do nothing for consumers except confine them to only certain people for their needed services, and support only state allowed sources of information. This is a concentration of power, and does no good for regular citizens. It is the core mechanism of corruption. By confining the term "engineer" to only those who have gone through specific schooling, it supports the power of the state run schools, leaving them as the only "credible" source for education. It's ALL a political power play. This needs to be stopped.
Yes, so we can return to the good old days, where those oppressive hacks in the AMA wouldn't keep us from the work of innovators like John Brinkley.
Certifications are not intended to prove someone's complete mastery, merely they have demonstrated a baseline proficiency in a certain field. Everyone certified is at least this competent. Does this mean every person certified is better than every person who's not? Obviously not. Is it possible for people to slip through the cracks of our imperfect education system, due to financial limitations, test and social anxiety, disenfranchisement etc? Sure. In the age of the Internet, where most of the collective intelligence of our species is available for free online, self education is more viable than ever. Self assessment, however, is as flawed as ever as well.
Tl;dr : flaws in the education system do not mean all certification programs are a nefarious tool of the bourgeoisie to keep you down. They do address legitimate public health and safety concerns.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DKS
like this

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
Well apparently a federal judge in Oregon does not agree with you and that is why for the time being he is still allowed to call himself an engineer. As it should be in my opinion.

All that does is put the issue on hold until it is clarified. As it likely will be.


That is what could come out of this, people like the guy in the article making a movement although I am sure he did not expect this.

Huffing and puffing, largely by people who don't understand what it means to be a part of a regulated profession. And yes, my own profession is regulated.
 

Darunion

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
4,400
Huffing and puffing, largely by people who don't understand what it means to be a part of a regulated profession. And yes, my own profession is regulated.

Don't worry, we could tell...
 
D

Deleted member 93354

Guest
To be fair, none of these things MAKE you an engineer either. I know many wannabe AEs that knew all the basics like this but were incapable of abstract thinking. They didn't last long in the aerospace industry.

Fair statement. Just because you pass the exam doesn't mean you are worth !@#$@# in the field. But it does mean you mastered the concepts and if someone handed you a problem like that, you could solve it.

You can prove baseline skills. You can't prove ability to solve abstract problems you weren't trained for.

But if you can't solve problems like this, I don't want you near any critical design work.

Now to as the many of you who are offended that I won't recognize you with the title of engineer, get the fuck over it. I never said you weren't awesome at the job. You can be totally awesome at your job. And your company may grant you that title.

But it doesn't make it so until you can prove your proficiency by passing the test and/or college degree. I'm just not going to take your word for it. Sorry.

I hate to bring this up as it may get my previous company in a bit of trouble, but they sold scientific instrumentation. Some of those instruments were over $1,000,000. Well the head of marketing worked there for 15 years and was the best salesman we had. And he came to me one day asking why something wasn't working on one of those million dollar instruments we sold. And I looked at the equation for flow dynamics developed by the chief engineer in the field and I said, you can tell by the equation is doesn't level in the long term. In fact the head pressure starts to exponentially increase. I then took the first derivative proving it, which took all of 30 seconds. He sold them something not realizing it wasn't capable.

But then he only had his degree in biology...and an AA at that. He was at the top of his game because he was a good talker. But he certainly wasn't qualified to certify $1,000,000 equipment outside of advertised spec. I had a nice little chat with the President the next day about his "qualifications" and our "liability"
 
Last edited by a moderator:

dethklokworkorange

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
176
He's implying he's a professional with knowledge that makes him qualified to state his opinion.

It's a lot of like the bawsers on here who think they know what's best and what AMD should be doing or what Intel should be doing. "I'm a computer enthusiast...I know what they should be doing" Do you understand the difference now?
Despite my last post defending the existence and merits of a certification program, I disagree with you as well. If the certification is meaningful enough, than anyone who is certified would identify themselves as such when acting in a professional capacity. A person speaking on city zoning issues would identify themselves as a Realtor ™, not a real estate agent. Specifically in this instance, the punitive action seems clearly intended as retribution. Engineer is such a broad term that one can't even be certain if the conversion is about someone good with math and stuff who designs things, or a person who drives a train (without context, obviously).
Tl;dr: He never claimed to be a certified engineer, just a non-specific engineer. As an aside, I find it ironic someone in the engineering field is claiming this detail is insignificant, and "close enough."
 

NickJames

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
6,686
In law, it is not. Law trumps custom every time. If it's an issue, look at changing the law.

Old laws get changed all the time, I don't see why not.


"Engineer," "professional engineer" or "registered professional engineer" means an individual who is registered in this state and holds a valid certificate to practice engineering in this state as provided under ORS 672.002 (Definitions for ORS 672.002 to 672.325) to 672.325 (Civil penalties).

It's a pretty vague law in my opinion.
 
D

Deleted member 93354

Guest
Despite my last post defending the existence and merits of a certification program, I disagree with you as well. If the certification is meaningful enough, than anyone who is certified would identify themselves as such when acting in a professional capacity. A person speaking on city zoning issues would identify themselves as a Realtor ™, not a real estate agent. Specifically in this instance, the punitive action seems clearly intended as retribution. Engineer is such a broad term that one can't even be certain if the conversion is about someone good with math and stuff who designs things, or a person who drives a train (without context, obviously).
Tl;dr: He never claimed to be a certified engineer, just a non-specific engineer. As an aside, I find it ironic someone in the engineering field is claiming this detail is insignificant, and "close enough."

There was zero point appending "engineer" to his name. He's implying authority and professional witness by appending a credential which is not certified.

He could have proved his point without titling. He was trying to assert authority by intimidation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: DKS
like this
D

Deleted member 93354

Guest
Ahem. That list looks looks awful specific to a single discipline--mechanical engineering. Electrical engineers (of which I am one, though I'm not a PE) don't generally take fluid dynamics, mechanics, dynamics, or thermodynamics, and my program (which is accredited and widely respected) only touched on CAD (only used in the context of circuit design/analysis). I wouldn't expect an chemical engineer to understand FEA any more than I would expect an ME to take a class in lines & fields.

That is...surprising. Those core classes true for all the standard engineering disciplines. (nuclear, naval, aerospace, civil, mechanical, electrical, etc etc) These are considered core and fundamental principals. And I'm sure you took all of them, with the exception of fluid mechanics, which is classified as an elective at some schools. But I took school in 1990-1997 (walked out with two degrees) standards might have changed since then for electrical engineers. The general idea was to have a rudimentary understanding, if say, you needed to build a robot for a factory and need to wire up stepper motors or hydraulics to control large moving arms. Plus I think they plan for "burn out" where engineers decide they don't like their intended field of study and switch disciplines. A lot of people burn out doing electrical engineering. And that's how I got my CS to go with my AE. I realized aerospace engineering was hugely tied to the whims of government which was unsettling.

Chemical engineers fall under the chemistry branch and wouldn't engage in such classes obviously.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Grahamkracka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
1,052
Fair statement. Just because you pass the exam doesn't mean you are worth !@#$@# in the field. But it does mean you mastered the concepts and if someone handed you a problem like that, you could solve it.

You can prove baseline skills. You can't prove ability to solve abstract problems you weren't trained for.

But if you can't solve problems like this, I don't want you near any critical design work.

Now to as the many of you who are offended that I won't recognize you with the title of engineer, get the fuck over it. I never said you weren't awesome at the job. You can be totally awesome at your job. And your company may grant you that title.

But it doesn't make it so until you can prove your proficiency by passing the test and/or college degree. I'm just not going to take your word for it. Sorry.

I hate to bring this up as it may get my previous company in a bit of trouble, but they sold scientific instrumentation. Some of those instruments were over $1,000,000. Well the head of marketing worked there for 15 years and was the best salesman we had. And he came to me one day asking why something wasn't working on one of those million dollar instruments we sold. And I looked at the equation for flow dynamics developed by the chief engineer in the field and I said, you can tell by the equation is doesn't level in the long term. In fact the head pressure starts to exponentially increase. I then took the first derivative proving it, which took all of 30 seconds. He sold them something not realizing it wasn't capable.

But then he only had his degree in biology...and an AA at that. He was at the top of his game because he was a good talker. But he certainly wasn't qualified to certify $1,000,000 equipment outside of advertised spec. I had a nice little chat with the President the next day about his "qualifications" and our "liability"
Valid points as well. Though my point about certain fields of engineering not needing a PE to be called an engineer still stands. Example: In my field a PE is almost worthless outside of VERY few niche positions. However, an FAA DER (Designated Engineering Representative) is FAR more valuable/relevant. Even then, that's only for atmospheric operation. If you work on space systems it's basically the wild west compared to our more "regulated" terrestrial brethren ;)


As to your second point, my company doesn't even consider anyone without a graduate degree in engineering for a Chief Engineer certification...
 

Grahamkracka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
1,052
That is...surprising. Those core classes true for all the standard engineering disciplines. (nuclear, naval, aerospace, civil, mechanical, electrical, etc etc) These are considered core and fundamental principals. And I'm sure you took all of them, with the exception of fluid mechanics, which is classified as an elective at some schools. But I took school in 1990-1997 (walked out with two degrees) standards might have changed since then for electrical engineers. The general idea was to have a rudimentary understanding, if say, you needed to build a robot for a factory and need to wire up stepper motors or hydraulics to control large moving arms. Plus I think they plan for "burn out" where engineers decide they don't like their intended field of study and switch disciplines. A lot of people burn out doing electrical engineering. And that's how I got my CS to go with my AE. I realized aerospace engineering was hugely tied to the whims of government which was unsettling.

Chemical engineers fall under the chemistry branch and wouldn't engage in such classes obviously.

Mohonri is correct. I don't know of any EEs that have dedicated courses for statics, machine mechanics, dynamics, thermo, or fluids. It's not needed.

Also in my experience the aerospace industry is fairly stable as far as engineering employment. If you work in defense, a program might get cancelled but there will always be other programs that need more engineers. The company isn't going to let you go unless you're a total shitbag. Finding talent is difficult and expensive, they'll do what it takes to keep the good ones.
 

Seventyfive

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
1,347
He should have said he meant his gender is engineer. Then he'd be getting an award instead of a fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DKS
like this

nightfly

2[H]4U
Joined
Jun 7, 2011
Messages
3,286
Not to be a snob, and nothing personal but just because you have the paper, doesn't make you a traditional engineer.
What, however, is a 'traditional' engineer? Someone who drives a train? Who gets to decide? I'm sure the guy who drives the train considers himself a 'traditional engineer'.
Much depends on the legal status of the title 'engineer".
I'm not exactly sure what legal status the word engineer has. After all, Elvis was the 'KING' of rock and roll, but we didn't call him on it for not being a legal king.
I'm cool with this law as long as I never have to call anyone doctor again without some sort of medical degree. A doctor of philosophy or religious studies? Gag.
I get into that argument with PhD's; I ask, 'When the call goes out in theater, 'Is there a doctor in the house?', do you answer the call? If not, I will refer to you as professor, not DOCTOR. It's also a lofty title, and no shame to be called that at all, and it also gets you the exact status that you have earned.

Different story if he said he was a doctor
There are actually people out there using the given name 'Doctor' or Doktor', I've seen it on their driver's licenses. Invariably, it's some unemployed illiterate numbskull who's mommy wanted to give them some fake status, good examples are celebrities such as 'Queen' Latifah, Prince, etc., or some other pretentious idiots.
One such was a guy I met named Doktor D.J. Joenz (surname altered, as it was a patient of mine), who introduced himself to our e.r. staff as 'Doktor Jones', in an effort to ingratiate himself to us. When we started to speak to him in medicalese, he just sat there with a blank look on his face, hinting that he was not what he was pretending to be. When he had to produce his I.D., it all became clear; he wasn't technically lying, but he certainly was trying to deceive us.

I'm not sure if claiming to be a cop is illegal unless you're doing so in order to get people to do something in the false belief that you have some sort of legal authority over them. There are plenty of retired doctors, nurses, cops, firemen, etc., who use the term to describe who and what they are, rather than what we do for a living.
but their is millions upon millions of non qualified engineers who beat the shit out of qualified engineers with their home grown skills.
^this is a great reason not to limit it to those who simply have the title give to them by someone else. Some of the greatest engineering feats in history were done before the word engineer ever existed.

Then his suffix "Engineer" should not be used as it has no weight to the conversation at hand. Likewise this mans "title" bears no weight as he implies by appending it to his name. As such it should't be on there.
How does the title of engineer get used in conversation? I've met people that introduce themselves as Dr. whatever, but I've never met anyone say, 'Hello, I'm Billy Batshit, engineer', unless he WANTED to be asked if he drove a train (because that would be the first thing out of my mouth, not able to suppress the comedic urge). Does anyone really go around introducing themselves and adding their job description with their name at social functions? I can see it now; 'Hi, I'm Donald Dickpole, porn actor'. Yeah, that would go over well. Might try it sometime. I can't imagine what it would be like being arrested for impersonating being a porn star.
 
D

Deleted member 93354

Guest
Mohonri is correct. I don't know of any EEs that have dedicated courses for statics, machine mechanics, dynamics, thermo, or fluids. It's not needed.

Also in my experience the aerospace industry is fairly stable as far as engineering employment. If you work in defense, a program might get cancelled but there will always be other programs that need more engineers. The company isn't going to let you go unless you're a total shitbag. Finding talent is difficult and expensive, they'll do what it takes to keep the good ones.

I guess different schools have different requirements.

But when I was in aero I went to apply for a job position as an intern. They were standing out the door and around the corner at the job fair for the companies that were hiring for aerospace. And I read over and over how contractors like Fairchild were cutting back due to defense cuts. But this was the end of the Reagan/Bush Sr era when such defense spending couldn't be justified any more. Hence my decision to switch. But that was a personal one.
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
What, however, is a 'traditional' engineer? Someone who drives a train? Who gets to decide? I'm sure the guy who drives the train considers himself a 'traditional engineer'.

I'm not exactly sure what legal status the word engineer has. After all, Elvis was the 'KING' of rock and roll, but we didn't call him on it for not being a legal king.

It has to do with qualifications, meeting of accepted standards and preparation to assume liability. Basically, when you make a vocational decision that affects others, your professional ass is on the line. BTW, the man or woman who drives a train is a 'locomotive engineer". And they, too, have vocational standards they are required to meet.

I'm not sure if claiming to be a cop is illegal unless you're doing so in order to get people to do something in the false belief that you have some sort of legal authority over them.

Depends upon the jurisdiction. Representing yourself as a police officer for any reason is a crime here.

There are plenty of retired doctors, nurses, cops, firemen, etc., who use the term to describe who and what they are, rather than what we do for a living.

They do, and normally they use the prefix "retired" and speak of their vocation in the past tense, unless they are still licensed and still practice.
 
D

Deleted member 93354

Guest
How does the title of engineer get used in conversation? I've met people that introduce themselves as Dr. whatever, but I've never met anyone say, 'Hello, I'm Billy Batshit, engineer', unless he WANTED to be asked if he drove a train (because that would be the first thing out of my mouth, not able to suppress the comedic urge). Does anyone really go around introducing themselves and adding their job description with their name at social functions? I can see it now; 'Hi, I'm Donald Dickpole, porn actor'. Yeah, that would go over well. Might try it sometime. I can't imagine what it would be like being arrested for impersonating being a porn star.

He's using it to append his name as to his credentials when making a statement to assert his credibility. When it comes to legal matters, then yes it does matter. He's contesting a ticket, which is a legal matter for which he is giving written testimony. I can't step into court and go "I'm Donald Dickpole" without being thrown out by my ear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DKS
like this

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
There was zero point appending "engineer" to his name. He's implying authority and professional witness by appending a credential which is not certified.

He could have proved his point without titling. He was trying to assert authority by intimidation.

Correct. He was using his vocational title to support his argument. But he forgot that the title has a regulatory aspect. Oops!
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
Old laws get changed all the time, I don't see why not.


"Engineer," "professional engineer" or "registered professional engineer" means an individual who is registered in this state and holds a valid certificate to practice engineering in this state as provided under ORS 672.002 (Definitions for ORS 672.002 to 672.325) to 672.325 (Civil penalties).

It's a pretty vague law in my opinion.

Really? It's crystal clear. You can't use the title "engineer" in Oregon without meeting certain criteria. He doesn't. And laws stand *until* they are changed.
 

DKS

Limp Gawd
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
481
Don't worry, we could tell...

Yes, Because most people outside regulated professions don't have a sweet clue what it means. This thread is a case in point. As I said above, being regulated means you meet objective standards, are prepared to put your ass on the line and assume liability for what you do.
 

Grahamkracka

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Feb 4, 2008
Messages
1,052
I guess different schools have different requirements.

But when I was in aero I went to apply for a job position as an intern. They were standing out the door and around the corner at the job fair for the companies that were hiring for aerospace. And I read over and over how contractors like Fairchild were cutting back due to defense cuts. But this was the end of the Reagan/Bush Sr era when such defense spending couldn't be justified any more. Hence my decision to switch. But that was a personal one.
There was a mild recession in the early 90's, the Aerospace industry is susceptible to such things like everyone else. Nowadays we can't find enough talent. My own company has a goal of hiring 2000 more engineers this year (obviously not all are entry level spots) and we are on track to hit maybe 40% of that.
 

NickJames

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 28, 2009
Messages
6,686
Really? It's crystal clear. You can't use the title "engineer" in Oregon without meeting certain criteria. He doesn't. And laws stand *until* they are changed.

You seem to be taking this far too personally. The title engineer is not what you think it means today. It literally can apply to anything.
 

percydaman

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 26, 2011
Messages
294
I might get bashed for this, but I actually disagree with the notion that "engineer" is a title.

Engineer is just a word. I engineered an alternative mode of transportation. I want to engineer x. Etc.. etc...

If you want a word that you can license as "a level of expertise" then you need to have a certification that says such. One exists for plenty of professions such as CPA for accountants, Bar exam for lawyers, etc....

Engineer is a universal word with no ties to any one industry, nor any one profession. You can be a chemical engineer, you can be a computer engineer, you can be a rocket engineer.... The word engineer in of itself cannot be tied to have skills in any one expertise.

It's like if someone wanted to certify the word "expert", and that no one can use the word "expert" without first registering an "expert". You see where I'm going with this? How is that any different than engineer?

No bashing from me. I agree 100%. The word is too broad and used in too many contexts.
 
Top