Requiest advice on PE exam

Joerg <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> writes:
[snip]
> > Two:  Should I ever get dragged into court without a PE plaintiff's 
> > attorney could claim that I'm doing engineering without a license and my 
> > attorney would have to defend that along with everything else.  With a 
> > PE that distraction would be avoided.
> 
> In CA that wouldn't fly since we have an industry exemption. In states 
> that don't you might still be able to fight that as discrimination. The 
> vast majority is non-PE and that represents a huge class.

You can't get in legal trouble for practicing engineering
without a license if no license is required.

> > Neither of these are big issues, but I intend to work toward a PE one of 
> > these days, maybe.
> 
> Just MHO: The competence to determine whether someone has achieved 
> sufficient knowledge to be an engineer is with universities and not with 
> a bureaucracy. Then we have to ask ourselves, why do whole continents 
> deliver excellent engineering without any license structure? For 
> example, pretty much all of Europe.

Deutschland, at least, has an equivalent to the PE.

Having a license doesn't guarantee compentence.

Many years ago, I saw a lengthy article in a Colorado
Springs newspaper by a (purported) PE railing against
the idea of the U.S. going metric.  He conveniently
overlooked that the U.S. is already legally metric
and he couldn't even get the computed conversions
correct due to using the wrong conversion factors.
The State should have jerked his license for his
demonstrated incompetence.

Jon Harris wrote:

> In my experience, PEs seems to be much more common in civil engineering (and 
> mechanical to some extent) than the EE, computer engineering, DSP, etc.
> 

IIRC the justification for requiring a PE is "life safety" issues.

I once worked for a firm making power industry instrumentation.
Some of our customers were nuclear plants.

The AEC wisdom was that original instrumentation N decades in future 
should be _IDENTICAL_ to that approved on initial license. That required 
generating a set of "frozen" documents based on what obviously would 
become more and more obsolete technology. I generated reams of 
documentation and willingly initialed the "checked by" box of all 
drawings. As the AEC evidently considered these to be "life safety" [or 
equivalent] I refused to sign the "APPROVED BY" box arguing that a PE 
license would be required [ not only was I not a PE, but I didn't even 
have an engineering degree. My job position was titled "engineer".]

Gee, I wonder if that contributed to me leaving early in a subsequent 
round of unrelated layoffs ;}

Hello Everett,

>>>Two:  Should I ever get dragged into court without a PE plaintiff's 
>>>attorney could claim that I'm doing engineering without a license and my 
>>>attorney would have to defend that along with everything else.  With a 
>>>PE that distraction would be avoided.
>>
>>In CA that wouldn't fly since we have an industry exemption. In states 
>>that don't you might still be able to fight that as discrimination. The 
>>vast majority is non-PE and that represents a huge class.
> 
> You can't get in legal trouble for practicing engineering
> without a license if no license is required.
> 

That's why we have the industry exemption.


>>Just MHO: The competence to determine whether someone has achieved 
>>sufficient knowledge to be an engineer is with universities and not with 
>>a bureaucracy. Then we have to ask ourselves, why do whole continents 
>>deliver excellent engineering without any license structure? For 
>>example, pretty much all of Europe.
> 
> Deutschland, at least, has an equivalent to the PE.
> 

Huh? I lived there for a long time but have never heard of such a thing. 
The only engineers who I believe need a "Staatspruefung" are some of the 
ones who work in agencies or other more public bodies. Like the 
engineers who do the roadworthiness checks on cars that are mandatory 
every two years over there.

When you graduate from a university and need your degree in English you 
receive one that says "Licensed Engineer" but that is determined by the 
university and not a bureaucracy somewhere else.

I have met people there who design huge wastewater treatment facilities. 
They just have their usual university degrees, that's all they needed.


> Having a license doesn't guarantee compentence.
>

I have seen buildings that had gross errors in the installations. Like 
missing drain lines from humidity controllers. The plans were stamped 
and sealed by a PE. If I ever did that to a client they'd have me tarred 
and feathered.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

Hello Richard,

> IIRC the justification for requiring a PE is "life safety" issues.
> 

And there is no evidence whatsoever that a license does increase "the 
safeguarding of the public....". IIRC even some licensing body leaders 
have admitted that much. Yet they cling to it.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message 
news:MN6ff.15627$D13.8939@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> Hello Richard,
>
>> IIRC the justification for requiring a PE is "life safety" issues.
>>
>
> And there is no evidence whatsoever that a license does increase "the 
> safeguarding of the public....". IIRC even some licensing body leaders have 
> admitted that much. Yet they cling to it.
>
> Regards, Joerg
>
> http://www.analogconsultants.com

In absence of an easy-to-apply test for competence, licensing is substituted.

-- 
Jon Harris
SPAM blocker in place:
Remove 99 (but leave 7) to reply 

Hello Jon,

>>>IIRC the justification for requiring a PE is "life safety" issues.
>>
>>And there is no evidence whatsoever that a license does increase "the 
>>safeguarding of the public....". IIRC even some licensing body leaders have 
>>admitted that much. Yet they cling to it.
> 
> In absence of an easy-to-apply test for competence, licensing is substituted.
> 

And that is often a very flawed strategy. Latest example: Our church 
wants to build an educational facility. The building license (or permit) 
still isn't there and it's been 2.5 years (!) by now. Everyone complains 
about poor school performance, then someone wants to do good and the 
bureaucrats can't even figure out how to get such a simple process done 
in time. It's pathetic.

In engineering the only entities that can ascertain competence are the 
university that gave you the degree, and your boss. But not a bureaucrat 
who checks off some multiple choice sheets.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com