For Brit Readers : Do you get fed up when a grease monkey is called Engineer?

Thus spake John:

Oh, fer cryin' out loud.

Solicitors and architects I would want to defend/design something that might land me in hospital or jail.

Come on, isn't this just a bit silly... There are plenty of professional engineering societies that one can join so as to favorably impress potential clients with your experience and/or knowledge for doing a job for them.

But isn't word-of-mouth advertising the best way to gain clients?

Protectionism is one of last bastions of the incompetent, imo.

It's public perception they are up against- the public do think an engineer (as in engine) is someone on the back of a locomotive with an oil can.

In the USA, what are the minimum requirements before someone can call themselves Engineer?

In most countries there are certain educational/training requirements.

None that I know of.

And why should anybody care? It's what you can *do* that matters, not what you call yourself.

Ah, I see the ego is international...

In the UK "real engineers" suffer because the public and industry in general do not appreciate the level of training and effect we have to put in to get our qualification. I worked from the age of 15 in engineering, doing an apprenticeship and studying for my engineering qualifications. This route has now all but disappeared and generally there is a lack of real training opportunities for potential engineers in the UK. Coupled with this engineer have little status (hence low pay) when compared with the rest of Europe and the USA. Few students now consider engineering as a career and this will lead long term to a decline in UK engineering when compared with say Germany and the USA where engineering is still considered to be a viable career option.

I fully agree its is what you can do that really matter, but when industry does not appear to value and reward your effort, why would anyone think of taking engineering up as a career. I have been a member of a professional engineering institute in the UK for forty years and have witnessed a steady decline in engineers status and pay relative to other professions. Engineers pay has not kept pace with inflation

Unless the UK government make an effort to promote engineering as a profession, the UK will not have engineers to support an engineering industry in the future because at the end of the day its the pay that counts. Having said all that I have had forty eight year of job enjoyment, twenty seven of these as the technical director of a major engineering company. For the last seven years I have worked for a major European product testing and certification group as a senior safety engineer and again have enjoyed the job, if not the pay. Unfortunately with great regret I would not encourage anyone to become an engineer currently in the UK, unless changes are made to the status they will have within industry. They will do better financially if they went into accountancy and have far less worry and hassle than as an engineer. The feeling I have express are common within the engineering industry in the UK.

BillB

I Eng MIED

The UK has "modern apprenticeships" now, for those going into work after GCSEs or A levels (ef at 16 or 18 yars old)

Rates of 800 - 1000 GBP a day for long term contracts are common and not exactly "low pay".

As with most professions, you have to move between posts to advance your career - umpteen years in the same job is not a good career choice for any professional.

I would have no hesitation in encouraging anyone to take up engineering as a career, within the UK - if they love engineering. In most engineering disciplines the rate of change is fantastic, so that getting bored with the job isn't going to happen. Even if given the same major project again, the solution the second time is almost certainly going to be radically different to the first. There can be no resting on laurels and tales of, "In my day, we did it that way". Keeping your knowledge and skills in date is a great challenge - more so than almost any other profession. Hence the need to love the subject - it will consume most of your waking hours. If you want to do the same old thing year after year then, yes, become an accountant.

The "disadvantages" are many. Three or more years of a *good* first degree with a lot of math. Anything less than an upper second is not acceptable, as it won't get entry to a masters degree. One or more years of masters degree, either as a taught degree or postgraduate research. But, if you love engineering, those years of learning are hardly a chore. Getting the first couple of jobs, gaining the experience needed for CEng.

But after that, the Universe is your Mollusc. What you do can really be, exactly "Rocket Science"..

A key phrase in the US is 'professional engineer' (or PE for short). To be able to claim that title, one must pass a state certification exam, hold a specific degree in the field of interest and maintain a certain amount of 'continuing education'.

In many states the final sign-off on plans for a wide variety of projects must be by a PE. Others may help with the design and analysis, but it's the PE who's signature appears on the final document that is culpable.

daestrom

It is legally protected (at the state level) in the USA for the purposes of offering engineering services and designing facilities required to comply with building and safety codes.

As far as the title goes as an employee, with the exception of certain code compliance design issues, a company can drag any bum off a park bench (and I think some do) and give them the title 'engineer'.

This is a state requirement, but to legally use the term Professional Engineer, one has to be registered. This requires at least an recognized degree, (4 years, normally), plus several years of professional experience. The only industries that *require* a P.E., are usually government positions.

In the USA these license requirements are set by the individual states, just like the requirements for a Medical License. In both cases there is much reciprocity among the states.

Paul,

Thanks for the info. Also thanks to Bill and Sue for their succinct comments and observations.

I'm intrigued to know if in the Sates, if you phone up a company to get the Heating Boiler/TV Antenna/Refrigerator/Dishwasher/etc/etc repaired if the company tells you they are going to send round their "Engineer".

John

Probably depends on the state, but where I live one cannot include the word "engineer" or "engineering" in the company name unless a licensed professional engineer is a principal.

John sez:

In the States it's common for an on-call technician to be called a Field Engineer when his job is to travel to a customer's site to accomplish repairs or such.

But so what? I doubt that whomever is asking for a service visit will care if he's called a "Service Clown" or Engineer or what. Similarly, when people are asking for design services, or such, I think they don't really care (or ask) if their title is "Engineer".

What's the purpose of your inquiry? If the customer doesn't care about titles (and I haven't read any evidence that suggests they might), what's the reason it?

Respectfully,

if he's an on-call technician then he should be called a technician. simple as that.

Only because they don't appreciate the differences involved between technicians, engineering officers and (and incorporated engineers in between) chartered (professional) engineers....because of opinions like urs.

because some of us who have got the appropriate qualifications might get to enjoy the increase in income that seems to be prevalent in countries where the engineers do enjoy a protected title. Oh my word...have i said a rude word about getting appropriately rewarded for my work. FWIW i was a techo for 18 years prior to getting my degrees and chartered status. let me tell you the responsibility is a lot higher as is the demands of my C.Eng position with respect to my techo days. No disrespect intended to technicians. They have an absolutely pivotal role in the order of things and good ones help make my job so much easier....but (usually) engineers, they ain't!

At least that's more positive than here in the UK where anyone can set up in business and call themselves "engineer" or their business "engineering".

Because...? ("Simple as that" rings as a mommalie similar to "because I said so".)

A customer isn't paying for the title. They're paying for results, regardless of what the guy/gal is called.

No, if you would again read what you said, you said you want to get paid for qualifications and titles, not for your accomplishments.

I am all for a creative educated person getting paid what they're worth. We both know plenty of people (of all titles) who create crap and get paid much more than their work is worth.

My point is that titles don't mean squat. If the kitchen help can reliably re-design the accounting network to make it more reliable, I'll call him whatever he wants to be called and pay him according to his success.

Something like a CEng does mean something. It means that a board of engineers has convened and gone through the individual's academic and experience record in great detail. Then summoned the individual to an hour or more of probing interrogation. It means that any complaint about the professional competence or ethics of the CEng will be investigated very thoroughly and will be acted on.

That isn't to say that a "kitchen help" couldn't pass the same scrutiny

- but only that he hasn't. So, as an employer interviewing a potential employee, you would have to do the equivalent of the board's work.

There are a few highly gifted *engineers* that I know that have no bits of paper or letters to their name. Often they went to Uni and left bored in the first year. I'd give any of them a job tomorrow - but only becuase I know how good they are. They are first-rate engineers who absolutely deserve the title. But they are very, very few in number.

I believe that the title of Engineer should be protected. A 'qualification', or 'experience' does not make you an engineer. The title should only be awarded to those who have demonstrated competancies in their field against a recognised benchmark. Only then will the ambiguity be resolved. Although this is somewhat addressed in the UK by the title of 'Chartered Engineer', few people aim for this title as it only holds weight in certain circles.

Best regards, Alan. (Working towards Chartered Engineer - view my profile)

I believe that the title of Engineer should be protected. A 'qualification', or 'experience' does not make you an engineer. The title should only be awarded to those who have demonstrated competancies in their field against a recognised benchmark. Only then will the ambiguity be resolved. Although this is somewhat addressed in the UK by the title of CEng, few people aim for this title because when obtained, you are still called an Engineer and so is the kitchen help. Frustrating.

Best regards, Alan. (Working towards CEng - view my profile)

My respect towards an engineer however is the individuals personal characteristics. Someone who is pompous can still be a certified engineer, but is probably a bad engineer. Thats because engineers are scientists, and scientists can only be effective when they have an open mind.

Does lack of an engineering degree negate scientific abilities? I don't think so, but the lack of a degree could keep one well suited from appling his skill. Solution. If you have the skill and want to apply it, go to college!