Slashdot Mirror
Oregon Fines Man For Writing a Complaint Email Stating 'I Am An Engineer' (vice.com)
pogopop77 quotes a report from Motherboard: In September 2014, Mats Jarlstrom, an electronics engineer living in Beaverton, Oregon, sent an email to the state's engineering board. The email claimed that yellow traffic lights don't last long enough, which "puts the public at risk." "I would like to present these facts for your review and comments," he wrote. This email resulted not with a meeting, but with a threat from The Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying [stating]: "ORS 672.020(1) prohibits the practice of engineering in Oregon without registration -- at a minimum, your use of the title 'electronics engineer' and the statement 'I'm an engineer' create violations." In January of this year, Jarlstrom was officially fined $500 by the state for the crime of "practicing engineering without being registered." Since the engineering board in Oregon said Jarlstrom should not be free to publish or present his ideas about the fast-turning yellow traffic lights, due to his "practice of engineering in Oregon without registration," he and the Institute for Justice sued them in federal court for violating his First Amendment rights. "I'm not practicing engineering, I'm just using basic mathematics and physics, Newtonian laws of motion, to make calculations and talk about what I found," he said. Sam Gedge, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, told Motherboard: "Mats has a clear First Amendment right to talk about anything from taxes to traffic lights. It's an instance of a licensing board trying to suppress speech."
Another case of "in order to be recognized as a professional, please fill in this form which has no purpose in real life and does not mean anything regarding your skill level". What next, should engineers "need" a certificate from some acronym heavy organization that lacks any relevance to current, fast phased world (I am looking at you ISACA and ISC)? The day certificates and pieces of paper became more important than actual relevant knowledge si the day when business went to "number two".
Don't live in America.
Now if this were a conservative state run by big corporations, you would also have them suing this guy for violating the proprietary intellectual property right of the algorithms used to control yellow lights. See there is no difference between conservatives and liberals. They both want to fuck you in the ass and will use any governmental, corporate monopoly, or legal statute to ensure that your ass is good and fucked. Your government wants to fuck you, Verizon wants to fuck you,
All Gore wants to fuck you. Trump wants to fuck you. HILLARY wants to fuck you. Chipoltle wants to fuck you. CNN , Fox, MSNBC and ABC also want to fuck you. You have a very desirable ass. It is best just to allow yourself to be fucked for the good of society. If you don't you will be labeled a homophobic racist child molesting homosexual terrorist.
Is the imbecile who sent the fine won't be fired.
Right. You are NOT a lawyer, but you are free to represent yourself. It is only practicing law if you do things for a client.
You can be an engineer without practicing engineering. You can be a Doctor without practicing medicine. A title doesn't mean anything when it comes to practicing a trade.
You don't need to be an engineer to measure slashdot advertisements now cover a full third of the screen while stories load and now 1/3 of the horizontal space which means the comment density requires much more scrolling.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
I'm all for restricting the use of credentials - like 'Doctor', for instance - to people certified by the state to use them. However, that restriction should only come into play when they're using those credentials professionally or to lend authority to a fraudulent claim, which this man was not.
He was speaking the truth, arguably for the public good, and he IS an engineer, just not one registered to work professionally in the state. His background does make his study and its findings somewhat more credible to those incapable of understanding it themselves... but he's RIGHT, so he's not trying to use that title to defraud anyone.
I hope he wins his lawsuit.
I worked in a place with a lot of people who worked in the Engineering dept. These folks designed, revised, worked with the people on the shop floor to resolve problems, etc. None of these folks were "Engineers". They were all referred to as "Engineers". It's just a common term for people who do jobs like that.
We also designed and manufactured a couple of life-critical gadgets - things which might result in a death if they failed. Those drawings had to be signed and stamped by one of our two certified Engineers. But we would have been find into oblivion, I guess, 'cause we referred to just about everyone on that floor as an Engineer.
I hate to be overly negative, but based upon my 30 years of experience of writing software for a living, your level of education is usually inversely proportional to your skill level as an engineer.
And yes, I did attend a very expensive and highly-rated engineering school at age 18, but I had been programming since I was a pre-teen.
If he wins the suit, there's nothing to stop people from claiming to be medical doctors and doing all sorts of (more) harm to society.
Just present the facts without claiming to be an engineer.
The thing is, he WAS an engineer, the fine was for practicing in the state without a license, even though that necessitates a transaction of some sort. They basically fined him for stating his education level in an e-mail as an excuse to punish him for disagreeing with them.
He IS an engineer, he is not practicing in the state of Oregon. Practicing is the part that requires registration, so this falls somewhere between a quick cash grab and wanting to shut him up.
If I understand the summary, he's challenging the fine for practicing engineering without registration as he doesn't actually practice engineering.
Perhaps it's not illegal to say "I'm a doctor" as long as you don't then go on to offer a medical opinion or perform a medical procedure?
Sigger than your average
Perhaps he would have been taken more seriously if he quoted a line from the movie "The Fifth Element".
Unless of course, there is some state or federal requirement that requires that a minimal percentage of meat by weight exist before declaring any said "meatness" and that said meat must be at or below the temperature of 32 degrees based on the Fahrenheit scale of measurement.
As an industry trained engineer, I've been doing engineering for a few decades. From designing computers and electronics in the 80's to performing and presenting current scientific research, it's just been a part of my life, but previously, I could only refer to myself as an "Amateur Engineer". It's not that I'm not trained, I just wasn't trained in a university. Back in the 80's when I learned to design computers ( as an autodidact ) there simply wasn't a university path open for me as I was in high school at the time, and I was taken in by an R&D lab before I could study further and quickly gained skills and experience beyond what the universities were teaching at the time so never went back to university.
Still, not being able to refer to myself as an engineer caused many problem, especially when registering for government projects or work - where are best I could only call myself a "technician" despite having working in many roles where I was the lead engineer and managed other engineers. It made it pretty difficult finding new work at times also.
Now the Australian government has finally recognized that if you work as an engineer, doing the kind of work that an engineer would normally be expected to do, for a period of five cumulative years, you've proven your point and are recognized not only as an experienced engineer, but as a professional engineer.
Anyone might still be able to claim to be an engineer in Australia, but at least those who have spent years actually doing engineering as a career and were trained on-the-job have finally gained formal recognition as providers of professional services now, whether trained in a university or otherwise. And it's in legislation.
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
In Texas, the Occupation Codes state that you cannot do the math if you are not a Licensed Professional Engineer unless you work for Licensed Professional Engineer (who is responsible for your work), work for the Government (primarily Military or NASA), teach and a few other exceptions. In Texas the licensing started because a person representing themselves as an engineer designed a boiler system for a school that blew up and killed over 100 children back in 1937.
Several textbook fallacies there:
*appeal to accomplishment
*holier than thou
*appeal to ridicule
*ad hominem(s)
All to support censorship based on an allusion to ("think of the children") perceived harm of someone not so ordained into this clergy you mention misinforming the masses by whistleblowing on the system while not having a certain piece of paper stating he has officially been indoctrinated into a certain groupthink category.
Perhaps it's not illegal to say "I'm a doctor" as long as you don't then go on to offer a medical opinion
But he did claim to be a "doctor" offer a "medical" opinion.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
http://www.oregon.gov/osbeels/pages/contact_us.aspx
I don't know whether it's illegal to claim to be a doctor if you're not offering a medical opinion. But it certainly is illegal to claim to be a doctor and then offer a medical opinion. Was this guy not claiming to be offering an opinion as an engineer?
What you would have to be suggesting, if this is meant as a defense of this guy, is that you can claim to be a doctor, offer an opinion about a medical topic, then say "well, I didn't directly say that the opinion about the medical topic was being made as a doctor. I was just giving that opinion as a layman, while also just happening to mention I was a doctor."
In essence, he was using his claim of being an engineer to elevate his opinion above that of a layman, and now is trying to claim that's not what he was doing. If he wasn't meaning to be giving the opinion as part of his expertise as an engineer, why mention it at all?
Not all of us incorrectly use that title. As a rule, I always call myself a "programmer" (or these days, I guess a "senior programmer" is more accurate) rather than a "software engineer". I think it's a more honest description of what I do.
I don't get my panties in a wad about what other programmers call themselves, but I can understand why certified/licensed engineers don't appreciate the watering down of a title they worked hard for. I guess it's the same sort of annoyance programmers feel when someone calls HTML a "programming language".
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
Along with "pumping your own damn gas".
"Dammit, Jim, I'm a...
Table-ized A.I.
How is firmware timing of stoplights outside of the realm of an electrical engineer?
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
The Oregon statute also defines what practicing engineering means under the law. The statutory definition, while overbroad, covers *working* as as engineer, not *saying* you're an engineer.
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors...
1) "Practice of engineering" or "practice of professional engineering" means doing any of the following: ...
(a) Performing any professional service or creative work requiring engineering education, training and experience.
(b) Applying special knowledge of the mathematical, physical and engineering sciences to such *professional services* or creative work as consultation, investigation, testimony, evaluation, planning, design and services during construction
To any Oregon bureacrats who happen to be reading this:
I'm an engineer. I'm also a train conductor. And a unicorn. Fuck you, Oregon.
Knowing how citizens of the left coast tend to think, they'll decide that the solution to this abuse of an overbroad regulation by power-hungry bureaucrats is to create more regulations, to be wielded by more power-hungry bureacrats.
Didn't read TFA but let me guess: red light cameras are in use and Oregon gets its cut from the take. So the whole discussion about the 'engineer' title (which is fine, you shouldn't be able to call yourself "Dr." "M.D." "Pharmacist" or even "meteorologist" without proper qualifacations) kind of overshadows the problem with the yelllow lights. Purposefully reducing the amount of time the light stays on yellow in order to trap more people "running a red light" is of course ehhhrrrmmmm "unethical" to say the least, and if someone says pure theft I won't contradict that.
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
Agreed, and being licensed as an engineer by some board in Oregon does not make one an engineer. Would be nice to have someone from MIT or Caltech to go and check their licensing requirements, and subject the board to a simple test to see if they know some engineering to begin with
The story is about an EE.....not some dude who said he is a Software Engineer or an network Engineer....
I know MCSE and MSCE look similar but they have different implications. An MSCE is a certified engineer with many years of post-bachelor education and practical training whereas MCSE is some Microsoft thing. Night and day difference. Like comparing the neighborhood drug dealer to a MD at a hospital. They both sort of do the same thing but good luck suing the drug dealer.
Spotted the Redflex employee!
Perhaps it's not illegal to say "I'm a doctor" as long as you don't then go on to offer a medical opinion
But he did claim to be a "doctor" offer a "medical" opinion.
I'm not trying to say that literally you legally can't claim to be a member of one profession and offer any opinion or perform any procedure that's even loosely related to that profession. I would assume that only in the case where offering an opinion or performing a procedure would be considered to having been done in the role of performing that profession would it be illegal.
eg. Claiming to be a pilot and saying the new Airbus is crap (probably) isn't illegal. I believe that claiming to be an engineer and going to work at a construction firm without proper qualifications, then advising the builders on the minimum diameter of steel reinforcing required for a concrete structure would be illegal.
Sigger than your average
Uh. What does Trump have to do with this?
This started in 2014 and finished up on 12 January 2017. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but Trump didn't swear in until the 20th.
So the entirety of this sad debacle in the suppression of freedom of speech happened on Obama's watch.
Not that it was necessarily Obama's fault either. But, by your brain-dead "logic" it is...
This is about a collusion between state government agencies to shut someone up who is attempting to alert the public to one or more agencies' shady practices at the expense of said public.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
I don't know, he wrote a letter claiming to be an engineer as an authority on a topic. Sounds a lot like hes practising.
So quick cash grab then.
First I've heard of it, but yes, there are FE and PE exams for "electrical and computer engineering". I wonder how many hundreds of dollars they want to register you.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
I just read ORS 672.007. Under Oregon law saying "I'm an engineer" counts as "practicing engineering". There is still a first amendment issue.
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors...
Still, I must say:
I'm the tooth fairy.
I'm an engineer.
I'm a unicorn.
Fuck you, Oregon.
In a time when you can identify as the gender you want, the race you want, or even the sort of military hardware you want... it seems awful regressive to punish him for identifying as an engineer.
The thing is once you state yourself as an engineer you are inferring you are an expert on the topic and are in fact giving a professional opinion/practising. He should not have stated his opinions as facts and linked that with stating he is an engineer.
Or Excel a reporting solution...
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Practicing requires that you be hired or at least offer your services for hire.. He was not and did not.
Licensing was invented by professional guilds solely to lock in the profit
You go on believing that until some incompetent fraud designs something that kills your loved ones. Then you will be the one whining about the government not protecting it's citizens.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Twenty years ago in Phoenix, an electrical engineer solved a problem with a freeway interchange that the civil engineers said was impossible and was going to cost the city millions of dollars.
are they going to fine software engineers as well?
Your entire post is argument from authority. Just because someone has the blessing of some shitty organization of gasbags doesn't say shit about his abilities. If what you said was true, there'd be absolutely no engineering catastrophes on record simply because no one without said blessing is allowed anywhere near anything critical. Of course, we know this is not true.
An engineer is someone who designs machines. If you design machines, you are, or at least have been, an engineer. Someone who's designed lots of high quality machines successfully is a good engineer. One with lots of fuck ups is a bad engineer.
While having a demonstrably good track record is important, paper-driven bureaucratic minds like yours are a plague on society.
You look ill, I'll just get my knife and fork and cut out that nasty looking poltageist for you.
'Engineer' is a protected word, it signifies you have passed the qualifications needed, those qualifications have been verified, you have not been struck off and any insurance requirements are paid and up to date. He asserted a protected designation without complying with that designation.
He either says "I *was* an engineer", or registers his qualifications, insurance etc..
I doubt there's a big conspiracy over traffic lights, and nobody can stop him talking about traffic lights. Only his claim to be an engineer.
If he's a doctor, he's not allowed to endorse medicines. But if you let anyone say "I am a doctor and I endorse this medicine", that would make a mockery of the rule.
He needs to stop this shit and be professional about it.
Afaik the question is wether he was practicing as an engineer. Offering a medical opinion is part of practicing as a medical doctor. If he claimed to be a pilot and offered an opinion on what he thought the pros and cons of a certain model of aircraft were I wouldn't expect that to be illegal as it isn't part of the role of practicing the profession of piloting an aircraft to offer opinions of the various qualities of different aircraft.
The question I would ask is "Is writing an unsolicited letter to the state engineering board regarding the safety issues resulting from the length of a yellow traffic light considered part of the profession of engineering?"
Sigger than your average
Had to do it. XP
He was probably mistaken to advertise himself as an engineer without further verbal qualifications or disclaimers to a state board. More interesting would be if he stated his education and experience and said that he is specifically not an iOregon registered (mechanical, civil, electrical, etc) engineer.
Public discussion alone of suggestion of errors, principles, calculations and opinions should clearly not be forestalled by such suppressive action. The fine sounds like a power grab in two directions, both over bland use of "engineer" vs "registered engineer", and criticism over the traffic lights. * Certainly if he was licensed and practiced in another state, there would be other Constitutionl issues * Many people have various engineering degrees and work for large organizations with registered discipline engineers carying the stamp * Much of the work is not in highly regulated areas, or simply involves research, operations, administrative and supervisorial duties * Much work goes on in new, evolving areas that would overlap disciplines.
Personally I think a lot of the problems with medicine include too broad licensing laws in was that conflict with discovery and progress by outsiders.
No, declaring yourself an engineer is a violation of the regulations in most states.
No, in the state of Oregon you can't use the title "engineer" unless you are practicing. You can be an engineer, work as engineer, etc. You can't claim the title unless you have a license. Other states are the same way but are not as strict with the usage of the term. In Texas, for example, a "professional engineer" is required to sign off on schematics and requires certification meaning you've passed tests.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
It does not matter who he is or what his realm is. They are retaliating against him by mis-applying some law for daring to bring up their incompetence. If not for this they could re-examine his tax return, charged him with insider trading, etc.
The point is there is regulatory recourse if you are licensed and are found negligent. That is a consumer (and public) safety issue of accountability. It is generally overblown in importance, but something is needed.
Well that's his point, isn't it? All he was doing is mouthing off. He wasn't offering to sign design documents for the State of Oregon, was he?
"Why didn't he ever register as an engineer, or at least stop going around telling people he's something he is legally not?"
Jarlstrom is an Engineer. What he is not is a "Licensed Engineer", or a "Registered Professional Licensed Engineer", or any combination thereof. As long as he does not claim to be, he is in the clear. Licensing and terminology varies from State to State, and in some Engineering fields, such a Electronics or Software Engineering, is practically unknown. It is most common in Civil Engineering, where a LPE needs to sign off on Public Projects, often in conjunction with a Licensed Professional Architect. They do not have to actually do any Engineering on such Projects. Their Opinion is what is valuable, not their grunt work. In California at least, they don't even have to have an Engineering degree.
We had one LPE on Staff to deal with such things a Regulatory Compliance, and to represent us and our work Legally. He wasn't even our most Senior Engineer; we had dozens of Engineers. His degree was in Physics. I doubt that even 1% of all practicing Engineers nationwide are Licensed.
This is pure Dick Waving by the Oregon Board. What put them up to it is as yet unknown, but I suspect that there is much more to this than a simple difference of opinion regarding what the single word "Engineer" means. Beaverton historically has had a lot of Engineers, practically none of them "Registered" Engineers. Licensing Boards can be good things, as a means of demonstrating competence. Here however, the competence of Mr. Jarlstrom is not in question, nor his work. Just what he calls himself, by their definitions. If he had titled himself "Grand Exalted Red Light Bandit", then his analysis may have actually been considered.
I hope that the "The Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying" gets castrated. They have a right to Trademark any combination of "Oregon" "Registered", Licensed", and "Professional" attached to the word "Engineer", and tattoo it on their Dicks. Until they do so, they are just a bunch of self-absorbed Wankers, grabbing after the Dicks of others.
Have I been sufficiently rude?
Signed,
A "Staff Scientist/Engineer". That is the Job Classification that appeared on my paychecks, paid by this State. No Licensing or Registration "Board" approval required.
The US Constitution forbids the abridging of free speech, which is a much stronger limitation on government than forbidding free speech.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
An engineering education alone without any experience does not make an engineer. However I would agree a "degreed engineer" is a legitimate distinction that should not be suppressed. Rather "registered engineer", particularly with the central disciplines and state filed, stamped paperwork, should be the legally protected term. Otherwise many issues of competition, guilds, Constituitional violations (e.g. free speech) occur.
Also context is important.
It costs money, but more so than that is that it takes a long time and you are required to work under a practicing PE for four years in order to qualify to become a PE. The issue is that that they are very few PEs in the consumer or automotive electronics industries unless you work in consulting or legal aspects (patents, litigation, etc). Because of this, in practice, it is difficult or impossible to work with or under a PE unless you are in the building construction industries where it is required for design approval.
This is a travesty*, the shameful, traditional closing ranks of an organization to protect their own. He is lodging a complaint with the board about a potential safety issue. Even if his analysis was entirely without merit it deserves a more respectful response.
For the record: I am a licensed civil engineer (PE). I am no longer a practicing engineer (retired/inactive).
*I do think he should have gotten a note warning him about the legal ramifications of using the term "engineer". Most people don't know it requires licensing. Having a foreign engineering degree means he doesn't have any background with US licensing standards.
Even then it's stupid. Most of the engineers in the world are unlicensed. You only need a couple of PEs in most cases.
Of course these days the term is already worn as thin as kleenex and no stronger than jello. IMHO we (professional engineers) lost all claims of governance over the term "engineer" the day the engineering license boards didn't wage war over "sanitation engineer".
I've been on slashdot so long I'm starting to get out of touch with the cool stuff if it ain't on slashdot.
Is Oregon going to fine Railroad engineers?
He claimed to be a doctor and gave the opinion that the other doctors were wrong. That's not a medical opinion, but a complaint. Shooting the messenger is a bad policy.
Learn to love Alaska
Oh man I wish I could mod this up. He did not represent himself as a licensed engineer or claim credentials as such. If he had, that would be a crime.
And FWIW my good friend who is a licensed P.E. could not even put "engineering" in the title of his side business because he wasn't offering true engineering services. I suspect the same can be said for medical and other industries.
However we all know he was really just using it in this case to try to give himself some credibility, not claim anything he was not.
One things for certain though, he is obviously not well versed enough to know yet that challenging ranking ideas unprovoked as an outsider is likely to get you looked upon with ire. I've dealt with many proud superiors in my field (EE). Usually I had to do it on my own time and and then present it once it worked and was provable.
Thought experiment. Let's suppose you're a CIVIL engineer -- the type of engineer the regulations are intended to target. You're on vacation in Oregon, and you notice a serious structural fault in a bridge which means that it is in imminent danger of collapse.
Under this interpretation of the term "practice engineering" you wouldn't be able to tell anyone because you're not licensed to practice engineering in Oregon. In fact anyone who found an obvious fault -- say, a crack in the bridge -- would be forbidden to warn people not to use it until it had been looked at.
Which is ridiculous. Having and expressing an opinion, even a professionally informed opinion, isn't "practicing engineering". Practicing engineering means getting paid -- possibly in some form other than money. At the very least it means performing the kind of services for which engineers are normally paid.
A law which prevented people from expressing opinions wouldn't pass constitutional muster unless it was "narrowly tailored to serve a compelling public interest" -- that's the phrase the constitutional lawyers use when talking about laws regulating constitutionally protected activities. In this case the public interest is safety, which would be served by a law which prevented unqualified people from falsely convincing people that a structure was safe. But there is no compelling interest in preventing an engineer from warning the public about something he thinks is dangerous or even improper.
So if the law means what they claim it to mean, it's very likely unconstitutional.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
But not in Oregon. Their law is specifically about practicing while being unregistered.
If Mr. Jarlstrom is a member of the IEEE or ACM then might want to contact them for help. The Oregon board of examiners should stick to examining lumberjack wardrobes. Anything other than that takes them way out of their league.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
A Professional Engineering License is independent from education.
You can have an MSCE (Masters in Civil Engineering) and not be able to refer to yourself as an "engineer" in some states (apparently Oregon) . I know several people with MSCEs that aren't PEs.
A certain level of education is required (varies by state and not all colleges are equal) to take the exams. I have a BSCE and my PE. I have reciprocity with a couple nearby states but if I head for earthquake or hurricane country I need a ton of specific coursework before I am qualified to sit for their exams. Rightly so, I might add, because I know jack about best practices for earthquake or hurricane resistant design.
I've been on slashdot so long I'm starting to get out of touch with the cool stuff if it ain't on slashdot.
But he's said it was never his fault, it wasn't his personal finances but the bankruptcy of companies his name was on. So let's hope he does not run the country the way he runs his businesses.
I'm a for-real doctor, but you wouldn't want me operating on you.
You are welcome on my lawn.
What about "an architect of a reform"? Do politicians need building design qualifications, too?
Ezekiel 23:20
Engineering has many specialised fields.
Generally stating you are simply an engineer is a broad statement and not necessarily stating you are qualified in the specific subject you are talking about.
For example, an engineer could be (say) a software engineer, chemical engineer, civil engineer, mechanical engineer, electrical engineer etc.Only some of these would be directly qualified to talk about traffic light timing
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
That's not a medical opinion, but a complaint.
It's both. (Except in this case the opinion is backed up with formulae that may or may not have been correctly applied.)
Shooting the messenger is a bad policy.
Andrew Wakefield (the UK didn't require certification of doctors until 2009) very much should be shot for the message he propounded.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
The engineering board does one thing, they license engineers. That's it, sending them a letter about anything while claiming in the letter to be an engineer is the equivalent of claiming to be any type of registered professional directly to the people that do the registering. It's beyond strange. This is like going before a judge and claiming to be a lawyer, that'll get you jail and a fine.
But he did claim to be a "doctor" offer a "medical" opinion.
Non sequitur through equivocation.
A doctor can be many things. A PhD in CS is a doctor. A PhD in CS saying "Using meth is bad for you" may be a medical opinion, but not illegal or incorrect.
Does the state even have statutes for electronics and/or computer and/or software engineer? I am or have been assigned the title per an employer for all of the above, with a degree for the first but the locality here only has registrations up to electrical engineering (they got stuck somewhere in the late 40s I guess).
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
2 cash grabs. He writes to complain about short yellow traps and ends up falling into the unregistered engineer trap. Well played, Oregon.
Also, if "declaring yourself an engineer is a violation of the regulations in most states", engineer visitors are surely fined and kicked out when they have to answer "what are you working as?" at the boundary gate.
This is just another stupid case. Whoever has more money will win this.
Electronics engineering is a valid degree in some non-US countries. I have a degree in it and was by virtue of it allowed to do certain things like program PLCs in a factory or make or repair robot arms.
In the US certification hasn't caught up to the electronics or computer fields or you get a very generic "professional engineer" license even though every help desk jockey gets engineer appended to their job position - not sure how Oregon takes that.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
In many places you don't need to register to use the term, but you may have to be licensed to perform engineering functions for the public (ie, if you open up your own firm). But my company has put "engineer" on my title even though I have no license, I have a degree with the word "engineering" on it, and I work for the engineering department. So sometimes I call myself an engineer, but I'm only fooling myself and am not fooling the public. I am not taking any legal liability for my work, the company takes the legal liability and it does have licensed engineers on staff to sign off on the electrical safety of products. As such the state I am in does not require me to get a license before I can do my job.
The state doesn't forbid me from saying I'm an engineer, though I would be violating regulations if I claimed to be a licensed engineer and was selling my services as such.
wow.
I would write: "I hold a degree in engineering."
And I really would, because I do.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
I find that a bit strange if your degree says you're an engineer.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
The 'practising' assumes payment. He wasn't paid, he gave his professional opinion without asking for payment or offering his services as an engineer.
This is a letter from a citizen, who is also en engineer, at least by education, and is not carrying out that trade.
WTF are they doing.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Read the requirements above. It says that he can't practice engineering without license, that's all.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Also "engineer" is a very vague term. it covers a wide range of jobs. For instance "software engineer" isn't normally considered an "engineer", but there are also "computer engineers" that sort of straddle the border. I know electrical engineers that probably would never pass the basic engineering license exams in some states because it's been far too long since they had to use the mathematics on the tests.
A licensed civil engineer probably doesn't know much about traffic lights but someone who designs, builds, and maintains traffic lights might not have an engineering license while still being the expert. So why does the licensed engineer get the opportunity to talk about something he doesn't know anything about while the unlicensed engineer is ignored for not having a license?
The licensing can be a bit annoying because of the different states with different rules. An engineering license in one state does not always apply in other states, yet it is a large burden to keep licenses up to date when you move to a new state. So many corporations don't care about licenses when they hire most employees unless the actual job requires it (ie, the employee will be signing off on legal liability about safety).
Maybe they could compel the state to finally do some maintenance on the road network?
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Or 'civil forfeiture' his car while he's there.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Let me guess... In order for not having to pay the bill they sued him for practicing civil engineering without proper license?
It's well known that electrical, and especially electronic engineers are able to comprehend very complex problems on average better than other types of engineer, so I'm not surprised that he did it.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
I have noticed that those jobs requring an engineering license are often more technical and/or rote in nature and are not at the top of their profession. Once someone becomes a lead designer in many companies there's no longer the requirement for the license. Depends on the job of course, a bridge designer certainly needs the license, but th designer of an electronic board usually does not (the certifications however probably need an underling with a license to do the sign offs).
Some of the tests seem archaic in some ways. Why should an electrical engineer be required to pass questions about fluid dynamics? Engineering is about specialists now, whereas maybe 100 years ago engineers were more generalists.
I got my engineering degree (EE) 31 years ago, but legally I'm not an engineer--I'm not a PE. However, my job title states Software Dev Principal Engineer. It's a case of the state of Oregon being ruled by fucktards.
Don't forget the companies who say "I want to hire you as an engineer" who never ask to see a license.
I started calling myself an "engineer" to friends and family once I started making more use of the engineering part of the Computer Engineering degree, meaning I wasn't just doing programming but also reading schematics, hooking up test equipment, doing some math, and so forth. After awhile, "engineer" started showing up in my job titles as well.
If someone with a license thinks the term is being watered down, then look to the hordes of electrical engineering graduates who don't have licenses, especially as electrical engineering jobs seem to becoming more and more about programming (VHDL, signal processing, encoding/decoding, image analysis, etc).
The difference I think is that the general public expects "lawyer" to have passed the bar, and "doctor of medicine" to have obtained a license. It's not as common for the general public to assume that an "engineer" has been licensed by the state. The public is not being fooled and the person claiming to be an engineer is not trying to fool anyone. I agree that the licensing boards are upset that all of this is being watered down over time so that engineer is now a generic term, but that's the way it's been going.
If you didn't graduate with a degree in software engineering then you are not really a software engineer. Sneak it into your job title if you like but I wouldn't be using it in an "I am an engineer" context.
I fully understand that software programming is a complex and nuanced skill, sometimes as much art as technical. That said, if you are just a programmer, call yourself one. Engineering is supposed to be far more structured and deterministic.
Most states have some protection around advertising yourself as a "Professional Engineer" (PE) or similar term that implies you are licensed by the state to provide engineering services to the public. Only a few states apply this sort of orthodoxy to the general term "engineer", and the enforcement tends to be pretty lax.
Check on LinkedIn, there are several million people listing themselves as some form of Engineer--while most of them have an engineering degree from an accredited university, the vast majority of them do not have any PE licensure, for the simple reason that in many engineering fields there's just no reason get a state license.
Intel is in Oregon--and they employ thousands of degreed engineers and they definitely aren't PEs. Those job postings are advertised as "engineers" and the employees use the term "engineer" on their business cards and LinkedIn profiles.
You can't even pump your own gas in Oregon - I guess that would make you a petroleum engineer or something...
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
It didn't handle your mother's meatloaf well, did it?
Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
He's and EE not a Civil or Mechanical engineer. He's got no business at all using his engineering degree to discuss things way outside the realm of his field. The state was 100% correct and should have fined him in the thousands.
Unless you're a civil rights attorney, you have no business at all using your degree (if you even have one) to discuss free speech. If it's not within your field of study, then you obviously can't know anything about it since civil rights are very technical and specialized and require years of study before you can even utter one word about the topic.
After all he wasn't "engineering" anything, so much as making a political statement.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
And you can have a doctor title without being involved in health care at all since doctor titles can be for anything. Even cleaning toilets (yes it has happened).
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
This is bogus. It is completely a question of semantics.
I know dozens of software engineers and sound engineers who advertise their services in Oregon without a license.
This is for a specific type of "engineering" related to surveying.
I know there is a huge "who is an engineer" debate going back probably to the Usenet days but this case is bullshit semantics and could easily get thrown out...it's definitely legal trolling from that Engineering org.
Thank you Dave Raggett
I don't know the regulations in your state, but I guess you're not a practicing engineer.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
As others have written here there is also an "apprenticeship" path to being a professional engineer, but it's more difficult than the other way.
In a lot of cases however "software engineer" is just a HR granted title and shouldn't be considered the same way as a professional title. For example, there was a guy on this site that told everyone in his sig for about a decade that he was an engineer when it was only a HR granted title, and that guy went on to say he knew 9/11 was faked because he was an engineer and knew about buildings. He wished to be considered a professional engineer equivalent to a professional civil engineer without even being what the above poster would consider a software engineer (but I'm willing to concede people using their HR granted titles so long as they don't try to pretend IEEE or whatever considers them an engineer unless it actually does).
> The 1st amendment does not legally "protect" you for lying. When you are saying "I'm an engineer", but the law defines
Donald Trump is an asshole and incompetent.
Do you think Trump would consider that statement untrue? A lie? There are all sorts of things that government officials have called "lying" (including the allegation that Clinton had sexual contact with Monica - Hillary called that a lie). Did King George and his government consider the things that Jefferson, Jackson, and Franklin said about him to be true, or would King George say Thomas Jefferson was lying?
It is precisely BECAUSE government defines words and tries to define truth that freedom of speech MUST protect statements that the politicians consider "lying". If you are only allowed to say things that the government agrees are true, that's not freedom of speech at all.
Think about that for a moment. The two options are:
A) Free speech only means you can say things that the government agrees are true.
B) Free speech includes the right to say things that the government doesn't consider true (including 9/11 theories).
Option A is no freedom at all - even without the first amendment, the government wouldn't prosecute anyone for statements they agree with. If 1st amendment only covered government-approved "truth", it would be pointless to even write the amendment down at all.
There is, however, a slight glimmer of truth to what you've said. The first amendment prohibits *government* from making speech a *crime*. It does not prohibit a private person from suing for damages caused by libelous speech. In a libel suit, truth is a defense. So truth matters - but that's in a civil suit, where some other citizen is suing based on damages - the first amendment's restriction on the government doesn't directly apply.
That's why most states don't have a criminal libel offense, and those that do rarely prosecute, because in most instances prosecution by the government is barred by the first amendment.
Indeed - many engineers are very poorly skilled at being technicians.
For example some years back despite being utter crap at welding I was testing and certifying weld joints among other things. It was a different skillset to welding.
I'm only working with computers now because the vast majority of all those highly skilled programmers out there completely ignored the mathematics needed to do some things so would need a few years to do so tasks. So you get engineers writing really crappy code that does something, if badly, instead of having highly skilled programmers not having a clue where to start.
When introduced to the language, I suspect (I wasn't there) that it was intended to describe disciplines such as mechanical or perhaps electrical engineering.
... Oh, you mean a *medical* doctor! My PhD is in astrophysics, so no, I can't help deliver your wife's baby... ...
Today, however, we apply this word to many other disciplines, including software development. You say you're a programmer. I say I'm a Software Engineer. Does this mean that if we both did the same role on the same team working for the same company and were based on Oregon, that I would have to pay registration and license fees and you did not? If so, then whilst the law may not be technically wrong, the passage of time has rendered it un-enforceable.
It's a bit like the old music hall joke: "Is there a Doctor in the house?"
It was Cardinal Richelieu who wrote, "Give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to hang him." Oregon are trying to bully people in to silence. Let's hope they don't succeed, for all our sakes.
I'd guess they don't have sanitation engineers in Oregon ? or software engineers ? Do they register train engineers the same as structural engineers ?
https://www.verizon.com/about/...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
Some lawsuits in the US are like Alien vs. Predator. Lack of common sense, lots of heavy weaponry and bony jaws. Safe to watch from a distance, with popcorn.
17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
"Why didn't he ever register as an engineer"
For certain kinds of work that fall under "electrical engineer", there is no certification because it cannot be marketed to the public. For example, I do integrated circuit design in processes which require a $10 billion fab to manufacture. No individual is going to have a $10 billion fab laying around looking for electrical engineers to feed it designs. There's is no point to advertising these skill to the public as engineering, so no one bothered to come up with a certification for it.
The letters from the board states that merely using "I am an engineer" in any form violates the quoted statute and hence necessitates the fine.
Are we (humans) nuts?
This case better end up in court and be judged be a H. Sapience person!
Perhaps he should use "I am a doctor of physics, math and reason"?
4wdloop
If had merely sent his petition to the government a a citizen like you and me, that would be exercising First Amendment rights. However, he claimed authority in stating he was making his petition as an engineer, i.e. that his pleading should carry more weight than a regular citizen, as opposed to being considered on the merits of the argument he made.
I disagree. By claiming to be an engineer, and applying engineering to a problem, he is practicing engineering.
Call it a pro bono friend of the court engineering brief.
Which in most parts of the world means that you are an Engineer.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
They are specialists in traffic routing and traffic shaping.
What the traffic consists of is a different matter.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Sure, that's a good point. And like I said, if that works for you, I've got no beef with it. Me, I program videogames for a living, so I think the title "programmer" or even the more specific "videogame programmer" works better for me.
Language changes over time, whether people like it or not. "Hacking" is what people know as computer crimes ("cracking" never caught on), "literally" now also means "not literally", and 99% of the population will use "begging the question" incorrectly, no matter how many times you-few-who-know-better correct them.
It's probably inevitable that "engineer" will come to encompass more than the traditional engineering professions. I look at the list, and I notice "Management Engineering". Who knew that was a thing?
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
I am a professional engineer licensed in Oregon. This is very typical for OSBEELS to do. The term "engineer" has very specific legal meaning, and in most states it implies registration and license as a professional engineer. The reason that Oregon and other states vigorously pursue people who claim to be engineers without licensure is to protect the public from those who claim to be engineers but do not have the education or experience to be admitted to the profession. Oregon happens to pursue these types of issues more vigorously than other states I have been licensed in, but this is nothing new. The claim that his first amendment rights are being violated is laughable (but IANAL). He is free to make his case, but he cannot call himself an "engineer" without being licensed.
If you didn't graduate with a degree in software engineering then you are not really a software engineer.
Really? No. A degree in anything is a fucking degree, and isn't a prerequisite for professional status or taking on a given role.
Shit, you think chartered accountants all have degrees in accounting?
I'll measure someone's software engineering credentials by their knowledge, their practices and their ability to deliver working software, not by the fucking degree they managed to pass.
Electronics engineering is a valid degree in some non-US countries.
It's a valid degree in the US. I took some EE classes in my computer science undergrad. Other people got the full degree. We even have a professional organization for them: IEEE. And it's highly respected.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Like many things in life this is a lot less white and black the more you read up on it, though there's still probably something to be said here. The headline is meant to grab attention to increase page hits (almost click-baity imo). It seems clear to me that had he not followed up his original email he would not have been fined. And it seems to have added weight to their decision that he was practicing engineering in their state, although as an audio engineer. It seems ridiculous that some (perhaps many) have seen the word "Engineer" as being magical, and only those with that magical title can practice "math" as though it's advanced magic that only learned sorcerers should be playing with. Math is harmless, it's poor implementation in structures and tangible items is what can be dangerous. I see a compelling need to have a law that prohibits a person from going around saying "I'm an electrical engineer" and soliciting work under that title when they are not. At the same time, however, a person who drives a train is an engineer, in a far more true sense of the word. What Mats has done is very gray. I won't be sad if Mats wins his lawsuit against the state, I also won't be surprised if they prevail as the law is there, he did push the issue, and he did seem to be practicing engineering without a license (in his professional time as an acoustical engineer). Also it should be strongly noted that in his original email he was soliciting work- he said it would be nice to be paid for this work he was doing and asked if they had an open position. After insulting their work it seems. Not the brightest job application...
Kind of sad to take that kind of an attitude. As I mentioned, universities weren't capable of much more than "Heath Kit" lessons of the era - Yes, I did do some study at university prior to getting a job in a lab, even if I never completed a course. Meanwhile, mid-80's I was already building computers from scratch, writing the OS firmware and then finding ways to improve on the architecture of the era.
What exactly do you think I was going to learn at a university that I wasn't expected to already know in the field? The head of department at the university I did briefly attend had already provided me with exemptions in every electronic and computer hardware related unit that was a part of the course. Even they didn't expect me to demonstrate any further proficiency in those areas.
I get that you were trying for a mix of condescending and insulting with your 1 in 10,000 remark, but in reality, anyone who continues working as an engineer for five years in industry, without being fired for being incompetent, has demonstrated they know all of the appropriate calculations necessary to do their job. At that point, it's pretty much 1:1 and the kinds of mistakes that get made are usually the same kind of mistakes that even a uni-trained engineer will make.
Even now, I still have to verify engineering estimates and ensure that they are correct, and it's rare not to find engineering errors in a large project - some big enough to prevent project success.
Being self taught wasn't instead of learning - and if you like the subject, it's never a hard slug. Being self-taught was the price of entry just to get a job in some of those industries in the early days. Learning on the job and being taught on the job both occur from that point on. It's just like university, except the passing mark on a project is 100% or find another job. Or, to para-quote NASA, Failure is not an option.
The Australian government recognized that 5 years of practical on-the-job training is as good as 4 years of university training plus 4 years of on-the-job training. Because it takes 4 years to train someone to the level than an employer will even look at them. So allowing an additional year for a non-graduate engineer to be trained at an accelerated pace is reasonable.
After all, simply having the title "engineer" isn't sufficient - you have to be doing the same work as a graduate engineer would be expected to do. It's not like I got a free ride or anything. Some would regard having to complete the equivalent of four years of university in a single year to be even more onerous.
I'm not the only one either - I've worked with a lot of other non-graduate engineers as well as graduate engineers and they were all at a very high level. It's not uncommon, but maybe you just got a bad batch up in Canada or something.
Here's the qualification requirements;
3.2 Engineering stream
Experienced engineer means a Professional engineer with the undermentioned qualifications engaged in any particular employment where the adequate discharge of any portion of the duties requires qualifications of the employee as (or at least equal to those of) a member of Engineers Australia. The qualifications are as follows:
(a) membership of Engineers Australia;or
(b) having graduated in a four or five year course at a university recognised by Engineers Australia,four years’experience on professional engineering duties since becoming a Qualified engineer;or
(c) not having so graduated,five years of such experience.
Graduate engineer means a person who is the holder of a university degree (four or five year course) recognised by Engineers Australia or is the holder of a degree,diploma or other testamur which:
(d) has been issued by a technical university,an institute of technology,a European technical high school (technische hochschule) or polytechnic or other similar educational establishment;and
(e) is recognised by Engineers Australia as attaining a standard similar to a university degree;
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
I fear I need to be a registered Social Engineer in order to post on Slashdot.
Worst. Signature. Ever.
Funny how you can be a pretend doctor, and actually kill people, and that's just fine.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
But in Oregon you're not allowed to say or write that without license, if the board gets its way, which it doesn't.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
I can't wait for the jury annulment if it came that far.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
How to become a billionaire in 4 easy steps:
1. avoid paying taxes
2. become millionaire
3. bribe legislators to write tax extempts
4. become billionaire
If my daddy is a billionaire and I inherit his billions, does that make me a winner?
His daddy was a winner, Donald is just lucky.
Do you understand his idiot sons will also become billionaires?
Will that make them winners in your eyes?
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
I think it is obvious that this case is about petty bullying, nothing more than that; whoever this guy wrote to felt he personally was being criticised in a way that he couldn't tolerate, and he used a petty and narrow interpretation of a law to get revenge. I would expect that if this goes to court, then the guy will be fully exonerated; this is certainly what should happen, since he was not in any material sense trying to practise engineering for fraudelent purposes.
The purpose of protecting certain titles and job descriptions is to protect the public against fraudulent and dangerous malpractice - it is obvious that you should only practise as a medical doctor, if you know what you are doing, and likewise for many other, important areas of life. Bad, legal advice costs serious money and poorly engineerind constructions of any kind can kill people. However, 'engineering' has been diluted to an extreme degree - in popular usage it simply means anything that requires some level of technical skill - hence the term SW Engineer, who rarely is registered with any professional body, and probably in most cases wouldn't be able to, since they don't work with the things you need a formal engineering education for.
It appears that everyone is missing the point. Here is a quote from the original post:
"The Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying [stating]: "ORS 672.020(1) prohibits the practice of engineering in Oregon without registration ...."
The fact that the Board lumps "engineering" and "land surveying" together is the key to understanding what went wrong. Land surveying is an old profession with lots of archaic/arcane terminology, e.g. "land man." Thus "engineer" means something specific in this context, something that the land surveying community interprets in its own way, possibly someone who has some specified above-average skill set in the field of land surveying. It is common for civil engineers to be licensed. It is also common for people who design wiring for commercial buildings to be licensed, and it is common to call them engineers even though they never took Calc 1. So it is likely that land surveying "engineers" are required to be licensed as well even though they might be no more engineers than the person designing wiring.
Whoever it was on the Board of Examiners who caused this ruckus needs to be kicked in the ass. Does s/he really think that every engineer who works for Intel in Oregon is breaking the law?
If you are an engineer, do not go on vacation in Oregon. If you truly must, NEVER engage in small talk.
- So, what do you do for a living?
- I'm an engineer.
- Ha! Gotcha!
Um, I thought that an engineer in the US was someone who drove a train?
Unfortunately, it's way too late now...
Well there are more reasons for that hope. Contrary to what so many people believe - being president is nothing like heading a company, and being good at one does not suggest you'll be good at the other, indeed the two jobs are almost exact opposites in the skills they require. I'll run through the differences just now - but it's worth noting that the republicans don't seem to recognize the importance of those differences and keep running businessmen for president. 3 of their last 5 candidates were businessmen - and to add injury to insult, they aren't aren't even good at picking businessmen since only one of the three Mitt Romney could be called a successful businessman.
Why being president is nothing like running a company: ... we're not his customers, we are his BOSSES.
- A business owner is risking his own money, the president is managing OUR money
- A business owner has customers, the president does not - those people out there using government services, paying taxes,
- A business owner has near absolute power over business decisions. A president is limited by checks and balances including congress and the courts.
- A business owner can make decisions single-handedly about things like spending and budget priorities, a president gets no real say in that - Congress writes the budget. He can tell them what he would like, but they have no obligation to care. If a CEO and his accountant do not agree on which departments should get budget priority, there is very little risk of the entire company shutting down for weeks - this has happened to government more than once.
- A business owner competes with his rivals in the market, but they take great care not to let each other know their plans and desires. A president has his competition INSIDE THE SAME ORGANISATION and has to negotiate with them on things they don't agree with - giving them some of what they want in return for some of what he wants and cooperate with them on things that they agree on and sometimes just ignore all their beliefs to do the basic jobs of governance together.
- If a business reduces it's expenses, there is almost zero risk of reducing it's income through the exact same action - this is almost ALWAYS the outcome when a government cuts expenses (because a government's income comes from taxing other people's income and government expenses ARE other people's income, and the income of a bunch of people who have never done business with government is reduced too - because the people who do business with government cannot buy as much from them anymore). As a general rule, austerity (especially in a recession) is the economic equivalent of saving money on your heating bill by burning your paycheck for warmth.
I could go on and on but I think I've made my point, frankly what I find myself entirely incapable of doing - is finding a SINGLE thing the two jobs actually have in common - a single overlapping skill between them. A good janitor is MORE qualified to president than the CEO of the company he cleans for - because a good janitor is good at understanding and executing the wishes of his superiors- and the president has a LOT of superiors, 320 million of them in fact.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Total space nut here - please tell us more. I would love to know :) :P
Assuming you're allowed to of course. Otherwise I'm going to choose to believe it's the station-holding reaction wheels for an extremely powerful spysat
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
You can be an engineer without practicing engineering.
When you perform calculations and make suggestions and forward it on specifically to a company to implement, that's no representing yourself. If they instigate changes based on what prepared combined with the fact that he stated that he was an engineer (and thus used the authority provided by the title which comes with registration) then he was engineering.
Technically there is a sort of unwritten rule that people who have an honorary doctorate but no actual PHD should not use the title doctor. It's not actually illegal or anything - but it tends to raise eyebrowse and cause scandals as it's seen as somewhat deceptive.
I'm not sure I agree that it should - an honorary doctorate could be argued to be a GREATER achievement than a PHD since to get one you must have made some pretty significant contributions to the field - getting one in a field you don't hold a PHD in is generally the preserve of an extremely rare and talented few. One could debate if an honorary doctorate in literature for a lifetime of great writing shows a greater or lesser genius than an honorary doctorate in physics for theorising a new particle that was later discovered by researchers, but nobody would claim either is not a pretty significant achievement (though this is one of the rare cases where the amateur poet is likely to be a LOT richer than the amatuer physics researcher - there is an entire career path out there for non-formally trained writers, not so much for untrained physics fans).
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
he is not practicing in the state of Oregon
Who did he address the letter to?
There is one key difference between his example and yours.
Who is the GP discussing free speech with? A random on the internet?
Oregon would not fine someone who was just discussing things among others, even peers. What he did do was an analysis which was sent to the owner of the specific problem.
It's the difference between our discussion here, and walking into the court house and discussing it to the judge during the hearing. Would your free speech protect you there?
even though that necessitates a transaction of some sort.
Errr, where is that written? Practicing engineering can be done for free without transaction. The difference here is the target audience and the recommendation.
His analysis wasn't some idle chitchat online, it was an analysis combined with the authority of being an engineer, sent directly to the group responsible for managing the equipment.
Why didn't he ever register as an engineer, or at least stop going around telling people he's something he is legally not?
I am NOT a lawyer. I am NOT an engineer registered in the state of Oregon.
There's a considerable difference between being a thing and being licensed to do a thing.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Where you need a permit to do just about everything
As the 1st Ammendment trumps State law then Oregon should lose the case but IANAL (at least in America) and I'm an Engineer (CENG) by education and profession but there is no way in Hell that I'm ever gonna stump up dues to keep my job. That is not a free society.
It is any wonder that the rest of the world looks at the USA and goes 'sheesh?' and they put up with this crap?
Any society that imposes laws like this is doomed to die a long slow death.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
I am a doctor. How much is that fine? Or do you plan to extradite me and throw me in jail for stating my profession even if I don't live/work in your state?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Who hired him to engineer?
Agree with your sentiment, but he could have made his case without trying to support it from a position of authority by using the title "engineer". If he was doing as he claims ("I'm not practicing engineering, I'm just using basic mathematics and physics, Newtonian laws of motion, to make calculations and talk about what I found."), then there was no reason to repeatedly claim the title "engineer" in his extended correspondence with the board.
Oh, whoops, did the flamebait summary leave that little detail out? This wasn't "an email". It was a long and protracted argument with the engineering board about how to do a particular set of calculations to determine yellow light timings, in addition to a publicity campaign on 60 minutes and an attempted lawsuit against the city. So yeah, the board is jerking off with their legal move to get him out of their hair, but he is doing a bit more than writing a blog or publishing academic research.
...will be next. "You can only transfer knowledge about Pi or the Pythagorean theorem in a cave, while an ox is being sacrificed."
"The wisdom of the Patriarchs was that they *knew* they were fools." --Master Foo
No; being a psychotic, traitorous piece of shit attempting to defend the entirely fucking unforgivable, I'd say you're probably telling the truth about not being an engineer. ;)
Thought experiment. Let's suppose you're a CIVIL engineer -- the type of engineer the regulations are intended to target. You're on vacation in Oregon, and you notice a serious structural fault in a bridge which means that it is in imminent danger of collapse.
Under this interpretation of the term "practice engineering" you wouldn't be able to tell anyone because you're not licensed to practice engineering in Oregon.
You certainly can tell someone, just don't claim to be something you are not. All you have to do is to be clear to state something like "I am a licensed Civil Engineer in the state of Utah, but not in the State of Oregon", or "I hold a degree in Civil Engineering from the University of Southern Calbabies", etc. Its really not that hard.
I find that a bit strange if your degree says you're an engineer.
Your degree does not say you are an engineer. It says you have a degree in engineering. If this guy said he had a degree in engineering instead of claiming he was an engineer, the board would not have fined him.
I'm not an engineer. I'm not a rocket scientist. But I am a rock scientist.
Geology - it's not rocket science; it's rock science
Laws that cannot be followed should be void. Just like a law that makes it a crime to exhale on a Sunday and to inhale on Tuesdays and Fridays.
He IS an engineer, he is not practicing in the state of Oregon. Practicing is the part that requires registration, so this falls somewhere between a quick cash grab and wanting to shut him up.
What are his qualifications? He is not legally an engineer in Oregon, the law if very clear on that. The board doesn't care about his complaint, they only care about his claim of being an engineer. Someone brought it to their attention, and they responded like the do in any other similar case that is brought to their attention on a regular basis. The only difference here is someone is publicizing it as some sort of conspiracy, and people here love conspiracies.
In reality, the board cares nothing about the claim or whether it is taken seriously or not. That is not their job. Their job is to enforce the engineering practice laws of their state, and that is what they are doing. For all we know the DOT traffic engineering unit is actually looking at the recommendation, you'll find there was no effort on anyone's part to find out.
He can post whatever he wants, but in a lot of states, you can't use the term engineer without registering (and folks, this is why the title "Software Engineer" is Bull). Basically the state wants you to have your Professional Engineering license, which requires certain schooling, and then taking the tests. Joke? Unless you are doing civil engineering, it is generally not REQUIRED, but you can't call yourself an Engineer. You may have a PhD in say Electrical Engineering, but you can't use the term "Engineer"
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
TL:DR;, Engineer is a title, granted by the state, not something you get for having an Engineering Degree
Except that Oregon has it simple, you have to be a LPE - Licensed Professional Engineer. That is a NATIONAL license. You take 4 years of approved schooling, and then sit the two LPE exams, and you are an LPE. Interestingly MOST of the exam is Civil Engineering (things like slump of concrete)
They are not the only state that registers engineers, and almost all of them it as simple as be an LPE, and register
Were you see this - real example. Want to put a ham radio tower in your yard? SOME municipalities require the drawings for installation to be "wet stamped" - aka the fact that the Mfg of the tower has down all the numbers that the design is good to XXX, and that the footing should be X sized, they require an LPE from that state to review the drawings, and stamp the drawings with his OK (they can not be photocopied) - aka they are "wet stamped"
Thing is, when an LPE signs off on plans, he is taking the legal responsibilities for those plans. Things go wrong, it is HIS/HER (I'll use he, as the vast majority of LPEs are male) ass on the line for lawsuits and possible criminal responsibility, NOT the company he works for!
This by the way is why we are not "software engineers". If we WERE, it would require a certified Engineer to sign off (first we'd have to agree to what a Certified Software Engineer IS), and that Engineer would be taking legal responsibility for any flaws in the software (not the company, although they may provide his insurance as a benefit)
It is a bit like being a "Member of the Bar" - the degree doesn't mean crap till they are admitted to their local Bar - and you can be Disbarred, and you can't call yourself a lawyer or practice law until you are a member of the bar - You'd have a law degree (JD) but not be a lawyer
BTW, where my daughter is going to school, as an example you can take
Mechanical Engineering - which is recognized by some large number of states, and allows for you to sit LPE
Mechanical Engineering Technology. Only a very small number of states allow this one for you to be called an Engineer.
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
such *professional services* or creative work as consultation, investigation, "TESTIMONY". You provided the snippet to support Oregon State.
And that is where the free speech comes in. He has the free speech right to indicate his education and capabilities. What he can't do is PRACTICE engineering in Oregon. That is, he may not offer his services for hire.
Back in the Sixties, my California employer opened a new operation in another state where it was the first major aerospace activity. A press announcement said it would bring several hundred engineers to town, and the local engineering society made pretty much the same complaint as in TFA.
We sent them a letter saying "Sorry, we don't want to infringe on the law here. Would you please send us 300 membership application forms, 300 copies of the sample P.E. exam, and the schedule for your next officer election?"
Never heard back.
No, declaring yourself an engineer is a violation of the regulations in most states.
I'm having a hard time even seeing your comment behind the enormous CITATION NEEDED sign.
I'm both an engineer* and a lawyer**, and I'm skeptical that any state would have a law/regulation—much less one that could pass constitutional muster—forbidding you in the abstract from saying, "I'm an engineer." Especially as regards people with degrees in engineering.
Does context matter? Of course. If you're saying, "I'm an engineer!" while inking your signature on a blueprint, that's unlicensed practice (in every jurisdiction that licenses engineers). You can also say "I'm a doctor" even if your doctorate is in Comparative Dishwashing. You just can't say "I'm a doctor" in the course of (here, illegally) attempting to provide medical care or advice.
*By education, but not a certified Professional Engineer.
**Bar certified and practicing.
Nothing posted to
No, declaring yourself an engineer is a violation of the regulations in most states.
Which I would consider a violation of the First Amendment (the courts have ruled similarly in some cases).
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Say something bad about government, and they will come after you. YOU WILL COMPLY..."or else".
The sea was angry that day, my friends - like an old man trying to send back soup in a deli
The very next sentence after the one you quoted is:
--
Through the use of some other title implies that the person is an engineer or a registered professional engineer
--
Note the "or". Engineer *or* registered ...
Bad law, IMHO, but law. Except to whatever extent the first and fourteenth amendments bar the state from enacting such a law. The Oregon statute is null and void when applied in a way the conflicts with the first amendmwnt.
Because you know how this could end.
Men with guns.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
That is YOUR personal definition of practice. But the law says differently.
Is the imbecile who sent the fine won't be fired.
It's not really that imbecile's fault - indeed they might not even agree with the law but still feel they have a duty to enforce it. The problem here is the legal protections engineers have managed to get in place to protect their jobs. If you want to see a really appalling example of this just look to Canada where engineering is operated like a medieval guild where everything is regulated; only existing guild members are allowed to train you and in some provinces making something like an electronic circuit means that you have to be a guild member. It's pathetic to see this in the modern world...and also really annoying if you are a physicist and equally if not actually far better qualified for some of the "protected" jobs - particularly when one of those jobs is teaching engineers physics!
Inheritance is income. Sort of.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
At 500$ it really isn't a cash grab so much as it is a middle finger and telling him to fsck off.
I'm all for restricting the use of credentials - like 'Doctor', for instance
My chiropractor thanks you.
In most (all?) states, Boards/Commissions can regulate LICENSED entities only. They can reprimand, fine in some cases, revoke licenses; BUT they must ask their Attorney General to enforce violations of law outside the Board's/Commission's jurisdiction, including "acting as a licensee". These organizations will sometimes exceed their statutory authority through ignorance of their state's laws. Slap down overreach where it exists...
Or give legal advice somewhere you are not licenced to practice law... Plenty of examples.
However I think the distinction here was if he was actually giving professional advice. In reality he was just a citizen complaining about street lights.
The association could have simply said like; while we do not consider you to be a professional engineer seeing as you are not licenced to practice, have paid any professional fees to our association, or registered as an engineer within this state, we appreciate your concerns and will consider your input, thank you. Then promptly threw his complaint in the garbage like a normal person. Fining him 500$ bucks is a bit on the nose.
For the interested, the Institute of Justice does a lot of stuff like this. (I don't work for them, I just like their work).
They do a lot of anti-licensing work, and they seem to be very successful at it: http://ij.org/report/license-t...
In many states, you need a license to braid hair or install windows. Hell, in many states, it's easier to become licensed to be an EMT (two months of training) than hairdresser (you need to go to cosmetology school for two years)!
It's a not a red vs. blue thing: http://ij.org/report/license-t... Many deep red southern states have very strict licensing requirements too.
It's really an example of regulatory capture which the US of A is a prime example of. And I say that as a very liberal person. The Institute of Justice convincingly shows how the licensing hurts lower-income people the most, mostly cuz they can't afford the lawyers or schooling that licensing usually requires.
So has SCOTUS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
OK, have a look at a lawyer's definition then.
Just like entering a subway station and yelling "I have a bomb" has nothing to do with free speech. You will and SHOULD be arrested.
In both cases, you are committing something illegal (although only one is criminal). Oregon is free to reserve the title engineer to licensed engineers. This is not a free speech violation.
Why didn't he ever register as an engineer, or at least stop going around telling people he's something he is legally not?
I think his glass was twice the required capacity
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
He was purporting intellectual authority of traffic concepts related to the timing of lights, not flaws in the implementation of electrical systems to implement those timings.
In other words: he wasn't practicing electrical engineering; he was practicing civil engineering, claiming that he is an "engineer" because he's an electrical engineer. See also: "I'm a microbiologist, and this is nuclear physics, but sure, I'll take a crack at it; I'm a scientist, after all!"
Support my political activism on Patreon.
That is not a definition, its a legal advice brochure. Have a look at the state where the law is. That is the only definition that matters in this case.
I was wondering why there was all that blank space there now.
How did they think this was going to go down when the internet got wind of this?
Clearly their $500 fine was the fiscal equivalent of "Shut the fuck up!"
Gladly, the internet is going to teach them an ugly lesson about being assholes...
Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
>locality here only has registrations up to electrical engineering
Take a look at the subjects. It's all power distribution and 3 phase stuff. The electronics I do is all around 0.8V these days.
To get a professional license to do engineering in microelectronics would require that you study heavy duty power electronics.
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
Dr. William H. Cosby Jr. would argue with you, and he is America's Dad, one of the most resp-...oh, wait, nevermind.
I feel sorry for people that don't drink, because when they get up in the morning, that's as good as they're gonna feel
Itr appears that the oregon law relies on the general definition of "practice" it does not itself define it.
Hiring is not relevant. He came with a claim of a position of authority providing what effectively is free engineering directly to the people in control of the situation.
If they act on his advice then it doesn't matter if money hasn't changed hands. He is in trouble not for giving advice but doing so from a position of authority which he didn't have.
https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors...
He should just publish his findings in a journal. As long as you've passed peer review, no one cares what your title is, or if you've registered to use that title.
They appear to also license architects. So, if my company sends me, a solutions architect (my job title), to Oregon I get fined for using it without a license?
Yeah, let them try that. We've got BIG lawyers.
I am Homer of Borg, resistance is - Ooo Donuts!
Umm...you DO know the difference between Wealth and income...right?
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Which is it? Outside the realm of his field, or a Physics 101 problem?
If you were a doctor and wrote someone an email about a particular practice (NOT a particular patient) would you be practicing medicine? I hardly think so.....
love is just extroverted narcissism
Listen up buddy, you're not a rocket scientist until Oregon says you're a rocket scientist.
Essentially it's a verbal shorthand for "Yes, I'm not just some schlub, I DO know what I'm talking about."
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Do 'electronics engineer'(s) (his words) need a ticket in Oregon? As you say, the more mature branches have stricter rules.
In any case he was spouting off outside his specialty, doesn't mean he was wrong.
Engineering (Electrical) school grad, but 99% software, hence never took the EIT much less got a PE. There was no 'software engineer' PE exam until I had been working for decades.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
We don't give our physicians MDs - which is a very high academic qualification, > Ph.D.
That is a NATIONAL licence.
Not quite. If you have license to practice in Oregon, that's the only state in which you can practice engineering. If you're registered in one state, you may be able to transfer your license through comity between the states, but that's not assured. For example, in Alaska, you also have to pass a class in Arctic Engineering to obtain the PE here, even if you're registered in Oregon. Washington requires that you work for longer under the supervision of another engineer than most other states. California requires that civil engineers pass additional exams covering seismic principles and engineering surveying.
The NCEES maintains, if you wish them to, a record of your licensure, including college transcripts, exam results, work experience, et c. that can make registering in multiple states easier.
The two exams that you have to take are the FE (Fundamentals of Engineering), and the PE (Professional Engineering) exams.
I thought that was the case, but did not want to go looking for a citation.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
Response probably would have been somewhat along the lines of "You are fined $500 for falsely representing yourself as an anatomist."
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
i'am a berliner
I don't know about the state per se, but the PE Exam (by which you become a licensed Professional Engineer) has options for electronics/computer/software engineers: http://ncees.org/engineering/p... Every common engineering field (and several uncommon fields) are represented.
He didn't do A, he didn't use a title to imply for b, and he didn't claim he could fix the thing. He merely offered observations to probably registered engineers for their consideration.
Actually in the eyes of the public and law it does. Also, the entire board is made of up valid P.E. holders in almost every state as far as I know (I think it may be required in most) and that requires them to pass the F.E. exam, the P.E. exam, and regularly resubmit documentation (think its every two years) showing they have furthered their engineering knowledge in a meaningful way (University classes, etc.) in order to renew their P.E. These are not just some bureaucrats that decide who is and who isn't given a license these are actually people within the fields. Most, if not all, would easily destroy any simple test you put before them.
So, given this scenario, is it legitimate for the wider internet to consider that something is fundamentally wrong in Oregon ? I.e. Is the brand Oregon devalued by such acts?
Requiem for the American Dream
Just ad Honorary to the title Dr and you are good. Then it's up to the reader to put values into that - or do their research for why it was a honorary awarded title. Some people just do a heck of a good job without hunting titles and some of them can rightfully get a honorary award.
Of course there are people knot knowing anything of the subject that also get those awards because they have at least promoted the subject, possibly as an actor.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
This sounds more like someone who was looking for a means to retaliate because you think someone is a shithead for challenging your decisions. Respect my author-itie! Shameful.
We'll make great pets
Does this apply to software engineers as well? What about a custodial or maintenance engineer? I mean, it's one thing if you're portraying yourself as an engineer to clients or the public for securing a job *in engineering*. That could be construed as a consumer protection. This is just completely idiotic.
Are you a registered or licensed Engineer? If not, don't call yourself an engineer, game over.
Jarlstrom initially cont acted OSBEELS via email requesting assistance investigating transportation engineering in Beaverton, Oregon. In that email, Jarlstrom stated that he was already working to protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public. He claimed that two City of Beaverton engineers were misapplying engineering practices and expressed interest in being a Board member because he was, “ already doing this kind of work .” . . .
Wilkinson cautioned Jarlstrom that claiming to be an engineer or using the title of engineer without registration is a violation. Jarlstrom responded, stating that he would correct his website and refrain from use of verbiage indicating he is an engineer. . .
In subsequent emails Jarlstrom sent to OSBEELS, he stated, “ I’m an excellent engineer as you can see from the results I can deliver to the world ” and further asserted that he is exempt from licensure which is, “ why I can call myself an engineer .” Jarlstrom
claimed to be exempt from registra
tion requirements because he was not offering engineering
services to the public.
It seems like the board warned him that he could not use the title at least a few times and he simply disregarded that.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
Thank you for the correction - I more meant that the LPE exams are "Nationwide", but then you have to register for each state - My bad
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
Since the engineering board in Oregon said Jarlstrom should not be free to publish or present his ideas about the fast-turning yellow traffic lights
Really? They said he "should not be free to publish or present his ideas"? Who to?
It's the "I'm an engineer" statement they're taking issue with, not any of his findings.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Frankly, for using his job to create the false impression he's an authority on something completely unrelated - he deserves what he gets.
Doesn't matter if it is considered part of the profession of engineering or not. It's First Amendment protected speech:
You don't have to be a licensed engineer to have a grievance concerning the length of a yellow light.
Not to detract from the overall quality of your post, but a business owner's customers are his bosses too, in much the same way that the electorate are the President's bosses: they're the people who ultimately pay him, and he only gets to keep the job so long as he makes them happy. A business owner who pisses off all his customers soon finds himself unemployed, as a business with no customers is no business.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The question I would ask is "Is writing an unsolicited letter to the state engineering board regarding the safety issues resulting from the length of a yellow traffic light considered part of the profession of engineering?"
That is a great question and I would take it a step further and add semantics to it as well. Was he qualifying his knowledge in a professional sense or simply as a knowledgeable concerned citizen.
If Joe Bob Hillbilly says writes a letter concerned or upset about the dangers of short yellow lights, it might be easy to dismiss as a know-nothing citizen with an easily dismissed complaint. But if someone suggests they have a qualified knowledge and are simply expressing concern based on that knowledge, maybe it would be taken more seriously. I can totally see that being this guys thought process in writing his letter. He wanted to be heard and he wanted it to be known that his concern comes from qualified knowledge, not in an advisory, consulting, or more literally a practicing manner.
How does this person mention a qualified knowledge without speaking directly to that knowledge that would lead to this sort of fine? Does he leave it vague, simply stating "I have qualified knowledge"? That seems rather ambiguous and again, easily dismissed by those who would prefer to think they know better.
But the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying, the one organization that wouldn't be deceived as to whether he was a licensed or unlicensed engineer, must be protected from his complaint?
So your point is that a "random" on the internet doesn't matter, but the Oregon State Board of Examiners for Engineering and Land Surveying should be able fine non-engineers for daring to bring engineering topics to their attention and claiming to the Board that they have an engineering education.
Which he sent to the state licensing board, which he is absolutely privileged to do by the First Amendment.
Mic drop. Licensed, practicing lawyer ouuuuuuuut...
Source?
He is an engineer. But he didn't say he's a registered/ unregistered / official/ unofficial/ practicing / not practicing / civil / electrical / software / science / industrial / computer / oregon / out of state engineer.
Also, if "declaring yourself an engineer is a violation of the regulations in most states", engineer visitors are surely fined and kicked out when they have to answer "what are you working as?" at the boundary gate.
This is just another stupid case. Whoever has more money will win this.
The relevant statute in Oregon is listed below. Simply by verbal claim implying you are a registered profession engineer, you appear to be violating the statute...
672.007 Acts constituting practice of engineering, land surveying or photogrammetric mapping. For purposes of ORS 672.002 to 672.325:
(1) A person is practicing or offering to practice engineering if the person:
(a) By verbal claim, sign, advertisement, letterhead, card or in any other way implies that the person is or purports to be a registered professional engineer;
(b) Through the use of some other title implies that the person is an engineer or a registered professional engineer; or
(c) Purports to be able to perform, or who does perform, any service or work that is defined by ORS 672.005 as the practice of engineering.
Back in my youth (about 30 years ago), one day the company I worked for made all of us change our business cards from "engineer" to "technician" because of these laws. My dad (a civil engineer) somehow convinced me to take the FE/EIT and prep for the PE exam even though my job didn't require it because in his world I got my degree in engineering and well dammit, he wanted to call his son an engineer.
FWIW that whole licencing experience was bunk for computer engineering. At the time, the exam for electronic engineering specialty wasn't up to date at all (mostly 3-phase power, pentode amplifier questions) and completely irrelevant for computer engineering (except for a couple Fortran programming questions). Of course the exams are more updated now and include computer engineering, but I suspect they are still not remotely "current".
To top things off, even after I "passed" the FE/EIT, I then discovered that my university was unaccredited** and the "pass" was actually a conditional pass which required me apprenticing for 6 years before being allowed to call myself an Engineer in Training and to sit for the PE exam. Since nobody in my company was a licensed engineer that certainly wasn't gonna happen. So I immediately dropped that whole idea of becoming a professional engineer just to put it on my business card and never looked back. I just call myself a computer architect (to the horror of my father) and that's that...
**I didn't graduate from a diploma mill, I graduated from a student mill (called Caltech) which is sorta accredited, but apparently not accredited enough for ABET ...
Trump is president AND a billionaire, and you're just some loser who whines on the internet.
And there isn't anything else to say.
Your conclusion does not follow the premises provided. You fail Logic 101. And that would explain why you're a Trump apologist.
And people still think we need more government intervention...
Well, yes, but not in this area. What's your point?
Especially in electrical engineering, people have been very casual about the use of the word engineer. Legally, when you say you are an engineer it literally means you are a "Professional Engineer" or PE. It's like saying you are a lawyer, JD, or a doctor, MD, and has important legal meaning. Specifically it means that you can be held responsible for your professional opinions and usually carry a bond to insure yourself against liability and that you have passed a competency test (one which I doubt many EEs could actually pass if they are more than a few years out of college.) Representing yourself as an engineer when you are not is, therefore, against the law and for good reason, having to do with expectations of assumption of liability.
There are only 6,863,795,529 types of people in the world.
That disappeared this week with Tom Perez declaring no pro-lifer can be a Democrat.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
They didn't just take a test, in many jurisdictions, they are bonded, as well.
There are only 6,863,795,529 types of people in the world.
I disagree. The specific flaw he was pointing out was in the implementation of the light timer.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Got to be a few out there, the tests have been around since 2009- but that raises the question, who took them before 2013 if you can't even take the test until you've worked under a PE in the same field for 4 years?
That's kind of like requiring 40 years of .NET experience
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Yes she is. LGBT too as well. A heteronormative person can't work for the state of Oregon anymore.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Great research! Leaves me waiting for his reasons why he thinks he can call himself an engineer.
According to his reply it's because he isn't offering services 'to the public', whatever that may mean, and some reply above seems to explain that in fact it's because (he claims) he's not 'practicing' engineering in Oregon.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Also, once past a certain size the business owners are very often not running the business. The stockholders and investors own the company and the board of directors has oversight, but the president/CEO actually runs the company and can be fired by the board. In general the president/CEO sucks up to the board, in the US the president often has an antogonistic relationship with congress, and congress is analogous to the board of directors
I'ts like saying the first job of an engineer is to get hired. After getting hired the company always expects some work in return.
wut? oregon better check itself, before it wrickity-wrickity-wrecks itself?amiright?lol i digress, fuck oregon.
The Republicans do a good job of convincing voters that running a company is a bonus for a politician. Never mind that CEOs are responsible for many of the same things the voters are bitching about - outsourcing jobs, hiring undocumented workers, moving plants overseas, automating the jobs with robots, etc. (the automation is the primary reason many lower skilled jobs are going away, that far outstrips any effect from undocumented immigrants, but it's also the reason for a lot of growth at the same time)
There's a complicated dance being done during elections to both keep big business happy while not appearing to be keeping big business happy. It helps that voters are not bothered by cognitize dissonance (candidate taking money from wall street is bad, candidate actually being from wall street is good).
That is a state by state problem.
In KY the PE is two part, the first is general engineering, covering the basics of all the fields reflecting that no one works in a vacuum. The second part is specific to a field.
I looked at a few newsletters I had and most of the enforcement actions wound up with agreements not to practice in the future without a license. Fines look to be limited to people doing engineering for money without a license. I don't see a single fine where money doesn't change hands, usually repeatedly.
I've been on slashdot so long I'm starting to get out of touch with the cool stuff if it ain't on slashdot.
According to his reply it's because he isn't offering services 'to the public', whatever that may mean, and some reply above [slashdot.org] seems to explain that in fact it's because (he claims) he's not 'practicing' engineering in Oregon.
What is missing from the articles and are in the minutes are specific reasons by the board: "Jarlstrom had verbiage on his website where he claimed to be an engineer, as well as referring to himself as an engineer in multiple emails to OSBEELS and other members of the public. Jarlstrom modified a commonly used traffic engineering formula and submitted it to various public entities while claiming to be an engineer. "
As an analogy, I would say if I hold a medical degree but never passed my boards, I am not a doctor. However if I make statements about medical treatments to the public about while proclaiming that "I am a doctor" would you say that I am operating without a license? Most people would probably say yes.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
OSBEELS investigator Wilkinson reviewed Jarlstrom’s communication as well as his website and then responded, explaining that the traffic formulas the City of Beaverton utilizes are governed by the Oregon Department of Transportation ( ODOT ) and are not within OSBEELS’ jurisdiction
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
I have the degrees and pay stubs to prove it.
According to Oregon your degrees don't mean jack shit unless you qualified and registered as an engineer in the state of Oregon.
First things first: I'm an Eur Ing certified Engineer (practicing and whatever) and hope that people become more conscious about what the fuss is about.
* Society does not (and should not) grant exclusive professional titles and rights for fun, it does so because it protects citizens' life(-state) and property.
I guess we would all hope society continues to do so: Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers are meant to help human life.
1)
In this particular case, there is no much struggle to consider that this gentleman comes with a case worthy of discussion and he should be heard.
If he is registered engineer or not, that's irrelevant per se. The technical case needs to be discussed regardless and I personally believe/bet he has a point.
2)
Furthermore, under certain circumstances he could be qualified to be called Engineer - it seems not so in Oregon - and the following is to be examined:
https://www.usaopps.com/govern...
In that, you may observe that an Oregon address is used as base for "Engineering Services", under his name; oops, that _may_ be regulated!
It IS his responsibility to ensure that he is complying with the local law - there is simply no excuse for that, if he is advertising engineering services.
fi. building code changes from place to place, there is no excuse for not adhering to it!
3)
This is obviously a "negotiation" that went out of hand from both sides;
the language below appears appropriate and respectful -not abnormal of a regulatory authority- however between the lines there is some confrontation:
https://lintvkoin.files.wordpr...
Hey, that's not how to build bridges - pun intended!
The case also highlights that the engineering community could benefit from some norms about how to solicit feedback from both licensed engineers and the wider public, and be held accountable, if there are omissions; there will be something to learn out of all this process.
fi. regular car drivers have plenty to confess about near-misses, which COULD and SHOULD shape the opinions within formal traffic engineering bodies.
The discussion is going to be interesting and it's great this takes publicity, because it will force some healthy debate.
So, let's not be too quick to circumvent the lawyers and judges, they are specialists under a protected profession, exactly for that kind of thing ;-)
NCEES is a scam, they are NOT an engineering certification body. They just collect money to do prep exams and 'maintain' an electronic record of THEIR exams which may or may not be accepted by your state.
They will even collect money to do a generic PE exam and create a record but won't tell you that your State require you to do a state-specific exam if you want to be an engineer in said state (which requires money to be paid to the State, not to NCEES).
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
I'm not 'most people', and yes I disagree.
The doctor in your example
has earned a doctor's degree by education,
is not treating anybody,
isn't getting paid by anybody.
He is merely stating his opinion about medical treatment plus informing the people that he olds a doctor's degree.
I think he can do that and should be able to do that without fear of being prosecuted by some over-zealous civil servant.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
...but is is the (US) reality..
This is why you can't find tech people in Portland. Nobody wants to have "code monkey" as their official title.
I'm not denying that there is a place for university courses and standardized testing. It's always been recognized. But if you're doing the same work as an engineer, for a similar period, then you're recognized as a PE in Australia after five years on the job.
I'm not arguing that one is better than the other - and readily admit that it's a lot easier if you can just get someone else to teach you - but if you're self-taught and applying it at a high level, every job is an exam and the pass-mark is 100%.
But calling me a technician is a little bit rude. All of our engineering work had to be done by us. This began with a design brief, and a project description. We'd design computers ( not assemble, design... ) and select the chips and chipset, measure up space and mounting points so we could design the circuit boards and begin putting together a new computer. No auto-routing - It was all done by hand to ensure we could achieve lower costs by using less layers - And we had to pre-calculate everything from power consumption to modes of failure. We had to create our own digital logic chips, and design of programmable logic was performed from data-sheets - not from high level applications.
When designing communications systems, we had to introduce error correction systems, and predict functionality of packet loss, and determine safe operating parameters with arbiter systems so that in the event of loss of control, the machine could be safely stopped.
When switching mains circuits, we had to calculate power factors and safe operating margins for all equipment, and unlike today when bugs are just a way of life, we had to demonstrate our computers would continue working under ALL conditions. A common test was for the boss ( a trained engineer and an expert ) to drop his keys onto our uncovered and uninsulated circuit boards and jingle them around, causing massive shorts, and our boards were not to fail in an unplanned method. All calculations had to be completed on time and any routines taking too long were trapped and reset, and the systems needed to come up from a reset without loss of data. Everything was designed to be redundant.Even code.
I'd suggest that's not the sort of stuff an engineer fresh out of uni could handle. Many struggled with the basics of electronics - especially timing circuits in digital systems. Most struggled with concepts such as building a UART from discrete logic, or constructing in-circuit emulators.
For those of us who did it the hard way, I'd suggest that the formal government recognition of our qualification as engineers was long overdue.
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
https://xkcd.com/277/
The word practicing can also imply giving your expert advice, which is what he did. But don't get me wrong, I think what Oregon is doing is total BS.
Just another day in Paradise
He didn't say, "The light timer implementation attempts to provide a yellow of 15 seconds, but is flawed and runs its cycle in 5." He said, "The light timer implementation attempts to provide a yellow of 5 seconds, and does so; 5 seconds is incorrect and it should be 15."
Unless the timer is technically intended to do something other than what it's currently doing, he was arguing civil engineering. According to his actual letter, he was arguing that the timing was too short from a civil-engineering perspective. He was arguing about the movement of traffic.
The specific flaw he was pointing out was in the time selected. That is an attribute which can be implemented by a mechanical, non-electrical system that moves candles about. It has nothing to do with electrical engineering, and is an ends to which you can use electrical or mechanical system--or a bunch of humans counting aloud--as a means.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Where is it written that you have to have a degree to be an engineer? Yes, I know that's the typical requirement for most HRs, but I've also know people w/o degrees who knew much more about software engineering than those with them. My point here is that your requirement is not universally recognized...I know my own company will accept 2 yrs of experience as equal to a year of college, and grant a new hire the engineer title. I personally joined them with a 2 yr degree (I've since completed the four), and 4+ yrs of experience and was titled as an engineer 35+ years ago.
Just another day in Paradise
Nah, they explicitly state that calling yourself an engineer counts as practicing engineering. ORS672.007(1)-b. It shouldn't. It makes it impossible to describe yourself as an engineer when you are not registered in the state, even if it's a true statement. It's an overbroad law that infringes on the first amendment.
It's not that hard, but it's completely unreasonable. If you are licensed or legally employed as an engineer in other state, it's appropriate to call yourself an engineer. It's a dumb law. Make Registered Engineer a reserved word if you want, but not "engineer". According to the laws wording, you can say the examples you give. But if you said "I'm an engineer, but I'm not registered in Oregon" that still means you called yourself an engineer, and thus, you're practicing engineering without registering, thus you've broken the law. That's broken.
He is merely stating his opinion about medical treatment plus informing the people that he olds a doctor's degree.
Publicly stating that engineers are wrong and at the same time proclaiming he is an engineer? I think you are disregarding those two pieces of facts.
I think he can do that and should be able to do that without fear of being prosecuted by some over-zealous civil servant.
He has been told to stop using the term which he ignored. The board has no say about the merits of his claims. In fact they're already told him that the state board has no jurisdiction on the traffic lights of the City of Beaverton as that is controlled by the city.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
He claimed he was an engineer. That is B quite clearly. If you don't believe it, ask a lawyer, don't debate it with me. Anyhow, you are just going to argue with anybody else's point with your shifts. I showed you the definition that matters, you can dismiss it if you like.
But if you said "I'm an engineer, but I'm not registered in Oregon" that still means you called yourself an engineer, and thus, you're practicing engineering without registering, thus you've broken the law. That's broken.
That would be a good enough clarification for Oregon.
Not according to the letter of the law: "A person is practicing or offering to practice engineering if the person...Through the use of some other title implies that the person is an engineer" 672.001 and "no person shall practice or offer to practice engineering in this state unless the person is registered and has a valid certificate to practice engineering" 672.020. You are not allowed to imply that you are an engineer unless you're a registered engineer. In practice, sure, they'd probably be fine with it. You are not even allowed to claim to be capable of building stuff if you aren't registered. It doesn't have any clause that allows you to speak in hypotheticals. It is a poorly written law.
...engineers are wrong...
That's a bit of an over-generalization. Have you never seen an engineer or scientist who had it wrong at some point?
The rest of your post is irrelevant as we already know he's doing this because he wants to be a member of the board.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
No, its a poorly written description by the 'engineer'. Those laws are common in many states, and they are typically enforced when infractions are reported to the board. There is absolutely nothing unique about this case, it is being handled consistent with many similar instances.
I'm well aware the TYPE of laws are common, and in my opinion, they are generally reasonable. The guy designing a bridge I might someday drive over better know what the Hell he's doing. But the wording of THIS law is shit. For comparison, At least in my state, as I understand it, you're allowed to call yourself a "contractor". But you are not allowed to call yourself a "licensed contractor", and you are not allowed to do things that require a licensed contractor unless you are indeed a licensed contractor. Likewise, in the contractor world, you are allowed to DIY almost anything, you are just sometimes required to get it inspected (and call before you dig). The wording of this law, it sounds like under no circumstance are you allowed to DIY engineering of any sort; even for stuff that you own, that is on your property. and that makes no damned sense.
That's a bit of an over-generalization. Have you never seen an engineer or scientist who had it wrong at some point?
That's not the point. The point is not whether they are right or wrong. This point is that he is not merely expressing his opinion; factually he's saying the engineers are wrong. In numerous articles, he contended that the calculation is wrong. "Convinced the cameras were using an out-of-date formula, he took his message to practically anyone who would listen — local TV stations, a conference of traffic engineers, and even the state board of engineer examiners."
Again, the state board has already said this issue with the lights is out of their jurisdiction as the city of Beaverton controls the lights; he needs to take up with the city. However, if he wishes to file a complaint with the state board, he may do so. So far he appears not to have sought to file a complaint.
The rest of your post is irrelevant as we already know he's doing this because he wants to be a member of the board.
You are aware that of the 11 members of the board, almost all of the positions require the registration/license that Jarlstrom says he does not need right? Can you see how it is relevant now?
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
That's MISTER Schlub to YOU buddy!
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
...an Engineering degree.
Voila! Complete the course, you're an engineer.
And yes, for working as an engineer you need a license.
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
Yes of course he's an idiot and should never get that position. ;)
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
In this case, a poorly written description is calling yourself as an engineer in a state where you are not allowed to do that in that manner. A better description would be to say one held a degree in engineering, or some other compliant statement. Engineers should be good at writing compliant statements.
The wording does not prevent anyone from doing anything DIY. But you can't publicly claim you are an engineer while doing it. If you do, and someone reports you, you will get fined. Engineers carry special responsibilities to the safety of the public. The average person doesn't distinguish between a 'professional engineer' and an 'engineer' by claim.
If you read the whole thing through the documents there is an email that he is trying to sell a better solution to Beaverton.
If you read the whole thing through the documents there is an email that he is trying to sell a better solution to Beaverton. There is an email to the local sheriff about it.
So if I have a creative work, and on it I perform investigation, planning, or design during the construction in connection with that private project that I myself own, by the letter of the law, I am practicing engineering. Again, this is because the wording is poorly written so as to be overly broad. You can't just say "that's alright because no one will report you for that." I should not need to investigate the complete history of case-law in the state of Oregon just to figure out whether or not I'm able to build a potato cannon in my own backyard without risking a $500 fine.
The average person believes that if you have a degree in engineering, that makes you an engineer. I fully understand that requiring engineers to be registered and certified is for the purpose of protecting life, health & property. But the law should stipulate that the laws only apply to circumstances that present a possibility of risk to other people or their property.
And further, 672.098 states that in order to register as an engineer, (which again, is required to practice engineering in Oregon), you must have "Have a work record of four years or more of active practice in engineering work satisfactory to the board". So I guess the only way to become an engineer in Oregon is to either break the law for four years, or spend four years practicing engineering in a state that doesn't have such poorly written laws!
The timer should be assumed to be technically intended to provide a yellow light warning for safety to get cars across the intersection. Thus 5 seconds is a bug, not a feature.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
Voila! Complete the course, you're an engineer.
My point again is that I can't listed my title as "Engineer" in the state of Oregon. In the other states, I can't list it as "Professional Engineer". In some states, I can't list "Licensed Engineer". Jarlstrom did that in Oregon. He was warned not to do so but disregarded the warning.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
You are just being stupid. Your description of requirements to register is only partial. Its not that hard to figure out and I don't have the patience to walk you through it. Or, I suppose you are the first person to figure out the law makes no sense based on cherry picked statements.
I'm not trying to act as though "lol, I'm smarter than the legislators, I deserve a cookie." or any such snarky attitude. I merely started to read the laws, found that, unlike many others that I've read, these have some confusing aspects, and I shared them. I absolutely could be misreading them but I don't think that means I'm being stupid. Laws are written to be overly-broad all the time, and they are thrown out by judicial review all the time for being overly broad too. Is it so hard to believe that this could be one of those situations? To every single one of my arguments, you've basically said "no that's not true" without providing any reasoning or counter-evidence. You've merely described your interpretation of the intention of the law. I'm not asking you to walk me through anything, but it would've been nice to see some sort of informative correction of my understanding before you started insulting me.
For starters, they have an engineer in training exam, which is a step toward registering. Second, you can do what qualifies as engineering tasks without calling yourself an engineer. Third, one can show experience from out of state.
This is just common practice in many states. These laws have been in place and actively exercised for years. So, no, it is not likely at all you found something that was overlooked. There is absolutely nothing unique about this case that would make it different than the many that have come before.
For what it's worth, I found the part that explains how DIY activities on your own property are OK; that's in 672.060. I also found where they mention that you can refer to yourself as an engineer as long as you immediately thereafter clarify that you are unregistered to practice engineering in the state of Oregon. The laws are still poorly written, in that they could've tweaked the wording in such a way as to not require a massive list of exceptions. And they could've made mention of the exceptions section within 672.020. I read through the equivalent laws for my state, and I'm not hitting the same roadblocks of confusion since the statutes are better ordered and organized. My state also explicitly mentions taking things like good faith into account, which, potentially could have allowed this guy to avoid such a large fine. Regardless, the guy paid the fine, so that's over. It's just the question of the 1st amendment lawsuit and it sounds like whether or not it is won depends on the specifics of what he is arguing for. His arguments to try and avoid the fine weren't very good at all, but it sounds like he's got better legal help now.
Ok, maybe you can't, but I can tell you you're an engineer. :)
"Trump!!", the new Godwin.
There shouldn't be, either. Software should have analysts, programmers and developers. Not engineers.
When I started my IT career, back in the '90s, my first certification was a Novell CNE (Certified NetWare Engineer). I remember the fight between the state of Oregon and Novell over the issue. I have no idea how it was resolved, because NetWare became irrelevant not long afterwards.
Many commenters here seem to not have grasped the entire story. I am a licensed professional engineer so I had an interest in finding out what was going on.
Review the article and you'll see a series of letters spanning a couple of years. The first at the bottom was (I thought) gracious, requesting more information, who he had talked to, and what "services" he referred to providing, and kindly informing Mr Jarlstrom that he really ought not to advertise his services as engineering services, since that is a violation.
He repeatedly insisted on doing so, until the most recent letter informed him that since he insisted on it, he was to be fined for it. It is him who is making a big deal out of this, not the board.
Now whether or not he actually does have good information is a different point, but so far I have not seen any indication that he was willing to work with the board in providing them with the requested details.
You're conflating "engineer" with "Professional Engineer", and I don't know why. After I got my engineering degree and worked as an engineer for a few years before going to grad school, I was an engineer. I was not a PE, because I didn't need to be. If the state thinks that not being a PE means I'm not an engineer at all, it can fuck off.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
Sounds like a case of bad Examiner Board management!
Perhaps the Oregon agency responsible for designing traffic light installations is too embarrassed to take responsibility for what another human was kind enough to suggest to them!
And, Mr Jarlstrom was not providing engineering services; yet merely offering qualifications to make the observation valid.
Knowing how to engineer and suggest is different than getting paid for the work!
Perhaps he is providing (unrelated) electronics engineering work for a company that covers his engineering with their registration and certification!
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.