Hijacking the Engineering Profession
Appears in Print As: Vantage Point: Hijacking the Engineering Profession
Burt Siegal
President
Budd Engineering
Skokie, Ill.
A degree from an accredited engineering school and a job in your company’s engineering department lets you call yourself an engineer, right? Think again. Professional engineers, a small fraction of the engineering community, are attempting to own the word “engineer” and are taking legal steps to have their way.
Illinois, like other states, has a Professional Engineering Act that licenses engineers who design roads, sewers, airports, power plants, and other large, public works. The Act specifically exempts engineers who design products or conduct research for manufacturers or industry.
Nonetheless, PEs are highly organized and have spent millions lobbying to become the gateway to determining who is an engineer. It is the relentless objective of the National Society of Professional Engineers that all engineers (other than Licensed Structural Engineers) become licensed PEs and pay annual licensing fees. In the mid-80s, they succeeded in amending the Illinois and many other states’ P.E. Acts so that using the title “engineer” or any of its derivations implies you are a licensed professional engineer. They have tried, thus far without success, to have the manufacturing exemption deleted from the Act.
The Act also lets any third party with a real or imagined grievance drag an engineer or company into court claiming fraud if they are not licensed. I’m living that nightmare. I have a BSME from the Univ. of Illinois and founded Budd Engineering in 1959. I’ve designed hundreds of products for manufacturers and have never practiced professional engineering. Yet the Illinois Dept. of Professional Regulation, which has not questioned my competence, is prosecuting me and my firm. Their entire case rests on the fact that my firm is Budd Engineering and I call myself an engineer.
The complaint was instigated by a former client. If they don’t allow the manufacturing exemption, I’ll be liable for two civil penalties of up to $5,000 each. A Class A misdemeanor and a Class 4 felony can also be imposed.
If the Department can establish a precedent against someone with my credentials, who is safe? Many engineers and companies may be forced to defend themselves or change their names. The Act leaves every engineering company vulnerable to being sued by lawyers on contingency. Unfortunately for MACHINE DESIGN’s engineering readership, similar P.E. Acts exist in most states.
The Illinois Manufacturers Assn., The Institute for Justice, and many others recognize the absurdity of graduate engineers not being able to legally identify themselves as engineers, and support my case.
I have better things to do than waste my time on this fight and spend my retirement fund on legal fees. I have promoted engineering all my life, so the last thing I would advocate is engineering fratricide. But MACHINE DESIGN’s readers and members of engineering organizations must coalesce to prevent a determined and organized minority with a large lobbying budget from imposing their will on the vast majority of engineers — threatening our livelihood and even identity.
Learn more about Mr. Siegal’s battle, including his countersuit in Illinois Circuit Court, at www.IAmAnEngineer.org.
Edited by Kenneth J. Korane
Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2012 Penton Media Inc.
© 2012 Penton Media Inc.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Facebook
Google
YahooAdvertisement
Supplier Search
Plastics Search
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
Mr. Seigal is right
I just had a call from the Alaska business licensing bureau an am facing a similar problem it seems. A civil PE had a problem with the fact that our electrical engineering company refer to ourselves (and our company name) as engineers. We are experienced and developing a product. What a form of legalized racketeering, and a disgrace. The PE licensing board can pretty much go to hell for this obvious greedy power grab. I am going to be hitting these guys with a legal onslaught from my New York Law firm.
The P.E.'s using State Boards to Harass Graduate Engineers
Go for it. I wrote the article and thought I was the only one fighting this battle for the huge majority of engineers that work for industry as employees, subcontractors or consultants. In Illinois they seem to think that the First Amendant guaranteeing truthful free speech can be ignored. My IRA (or what's left of it) is financing a legal battle that has been running since 2004. I wish the plastic, optical, software and dozens of other engineering individuals and societies whos specialties are not even addressed by one question on the P.E. exam would join in this battle while it still can be won.
Burton is twisting Illinois' Engineering laws
In Illinois, any one can call themselves an engineer. It is not illegal for one to use the word engineer as Siegal says to be so.
What can not happen in Illinois is a company or individual using the term "engineer" while soliciting business from other companies or individuals without having passed the professional engineering exam.
Siegal who is not a licensed professional engineer,is saying that if he loses this case all unlicensed engineers may be out of jobs... look at his website.
In my opinion he is attempting to incite fear in unlicensed engineers for donations to his legal defense.
When you see all the papers, letters, depositions involved in the case it is very clear, in my opinion, that Rita and Burton have been aware of their illegal activities since 1960.
In 1960 Illinois told Siegal, in a letter, that he can not hold himself out as a consultant in the engineering field.
He advertised anyway in the yellow pages under engineers. Illinois sent him a desist lettter in 1963 and the Illinois' Attorney General backed this letter up with an opinion that he was breaking the law.
In 1985 Siegal then admitted in a letter to the yellow pages that placing his firm under "engineers-professional" was "breaking the law" and his wife removed their ad from the yellow pages.
A year or two later Rita then placed Budd Enginering back in the yellow pages because business was down substantialy and they had young kids to feed. I know this sounds crazy... but she admitted this in her deposition!
Burton claims awards etc. I claim no firm would have ever hired him had they known he was not licensed to offer engineering services in Illinois or any other state.
U. of I. has him as a distinguished Alumni... Let's see what they think when they see all the letters proving his knowledge of his wife's and his unlicensed activities... universities are quick to jettison people that blemish their reputations. Look at the footbal coach who didn't follow the rules.
If you still believe Siegal doesn't need to be licensed to offer enginering services that affect people's safety, then feel free to take your daughter to one of the unlicensed "Doctors" on the internet that will do some bang-up plastic surgery for her? Make sure you have a lot of money to marry her off once she comes back lookin' like something from a horror movie.
Licensing is a benchmark that state's have set for fields that affect public safety. Engineering is one of those fields.
Without these benchmarks any Bozo could become a cunsultant in the engineering field and maybe even do a coupla things right.
Burt Siegal topic
To whom it concerns,
I totally agree with Mr Siegal. I have engineering skills and a
4 year engineering degree. I work for a University that is filled
with people who work with the state and they are not p.e.s and
I know of fellows who are probably the best engineers i
know of and they are not pes. Why? They are not part of the
good ole boy shine my shoes network. Just because
you have a P.E associated with your name does NOT
make you any more knowledgable in a field.I have
witnessed so called P.Es not being able to figure
out a problem and come running to me for an answer!!?
Come on, give Mr siegal a break. This is just like Unions.
you pay you play. If not you Pay!!!. If this child-like mentallity
was adopted at the beginnings of this country, then tesla,
Westinghouse, Edison, etc would have been prosecuted.
Men like siegal have given this country an avenue of
skill, technology via inventions. Compare the inventions
of engineers without P.E. titles to the ones with. You will
probably find that the ones with are only worried about
their image.Bottom line, Titles dont make an engineer,
their Deeds do. Sounds like big brother trying to get more
money for nothing. And yes Im not being nice. Why should i,
Im not a P.E., Im only a design engineer who has to hand hold
The P.E.s in my dept. Once i solve the problem they run to our
supervisor and claim a long struggle has been fought but THEY
figured it out, even though i did all the work and number
crunching.Sounds familiar?They get promoted on my work
while i dont, so arrogant P.Es and the backwoods legislature
of each state can jump in a lake.
the title of engineer was hijacked by corporations a long time a
I find it odd that you are claiming that an organization that is promoting the profession of engineering is "hijacking" the title. I have worked as an engineer here in California for 20yrs. Unfortunately, the use of the term "engineer" has long ago been hijacked by industry. Greedy corporations hand out engineering titles to whomever they please as a means of appeasing employees egos and to make managers feel important. I have seen numerous people with math and computer science degrees working as "software engineers". This alone would not bother me too much. But I have also seen people with business degrees, art history degrees, 2-year electronics technician degrees, and no degrees at all working as engineers. To be sure, these are intelligent and motivated people (well... most of them). However, regardless of the title on their corporate business cards, they are not engineers. While few of them showed any significant ability to solve hard-core engineering problems, they were nonetheless able to survive (even thrive) in environments where there is a dearth of such problems. That is, most of these people just wind up as programmers or designers, hacking away on architectures and standards laid out for them by someone else, and using their tools to insulate themselves from any significant engineering effort. Yet, as an example, when presented with a simple control-theory problem that an engineering student could solve in an hour, I have seen the same set of people flounder around for days on end "solving" it by trial and error, only to arrive at non-optimal solutions created by lumping the most non-linear of heuristic algorithms together. Unstable at best, downright dangerous at worst. Do real engineers (PEs) make mistakes?... of course they do!, but real engineers will inject discipline into the design approach used. They will use the best engineering practices available and not simply re-invent the wheel at every turn of the corner.
Comment
Further to the argument............. There are many people doing valuable engineering work who do have even the BS degree. So if you are doing engineering work.it is academic, you are, by definition, an engineer. It is the responsibility of the company and individual to remove themselves from situations for which they are not qualified. I know people with a degree in English working who work as computer engineers and the companies are happy to find them . When was the last time you used calculus as an engineer? We all specialize and you can lose what you don't use. Education is never over and PHD's can always learn. So business owners do what they do best and take courses in what they require as the need arises. They also employ the experts and licensed people they need. I also have seen PE's getting involved in the yacht design industry trying to diminish the works of yacht designers. Just as in the old film where the guy wishes he was never born, try removing all the engineering work don't since the beginning of time until today done by non-degree people and the world would collapse. When will it all end? Every field has been sliced and diced and every nook and cranny has been looked at to create a new entity for special interests. Maybe if there was more available work everyone could just do their job like in the old days. The handful of jobs still left are used to juggle the books and add heretofore non-existent job titles so the few can carry a large support group. Can we get one with it? Maybe apply the brakes and do a reality check? Concerned "engineer"
Our Right to Truthfully Be Identified as Engineers
Mr. White,
I quite agree with your well reasoned and articulated comments. You also had the restraint to omit the obvious example of a janitor calling himself a "building engineer". However well you presented your comments, you missed the point of the original article I wrote. I earned a BSME from the University of Illinois, one of the best engineering schools in the country, who picked me as one of three outstanding engineering alumni in 2005. As you probably know Illinois and most other states do not require all engineers to be licensed, only those who design large public works and facilities. I and probably 80% of all engineers work for industry and are exempt, as the public is better protected by the alphabet soup of standards, regulations and laws that apply to the products we design. How can getting 70% right on a test of fundamentals we learned in college and later passing one of the few optional P.E. tests that may not have a single question related to our field of specialization assure the competence of engineers who design fiber optic gyros, work in nano technology, GPS or a hundred other specialties ignored by the second set of exams?
The point of the article is that the Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation (IDFPR), who has repeatedly ruled me exempt begining in 1960 thru as recently as 2004, does not question my competence, but wants me to stop using the title, "engineer" and remove "engineering" from the name of my 51 year old, but now only a two person corporation.
In a half century I have designed hundreds of products that not one of which has ever involved me in a product liability action or any complaint of any kind. The department's action is in response to a complaint (the very first) by a former client for whom I did about 9 hours of work designing an aluminum extrusion; a skill for which I have won international design competitions. In what may be the first case in the country, he is using a clause in the P.E. Act to sue my wife and I for FRAUD, because I call myself an engineer without having a P.E. license. I am forced to fight two five year and running legal battles to truthfully refer to myself as an engineer. Many P.E.'s have posted comments on my behalf. If you look there are a couple of anonymous postings (shaded in gray) that I believe were written by the person who has sued me. You can judge for yourself as to their accuracy.
I am not against the about 45,000 member NSPE. Some of their practices are positive like promoting engineering, ethics and continuing education. I am dedicated to them. However, they and the regulation departments whose boards they control, have no basis for stealing my identity.
Liability in reality
A few years back some slender beams were erected over I70 in Colorado. The staying was completely wrong. A PE in charge of the project allowed the road underneath to be reopened. Within a short time the girder and its supports sagged a little and the staying was such that it twisted the top of the beam causing a positive feedback loop that led to the beam's collapse. The beam fell onto an SUV killing an entire family of four.
I have never heard of any censure of the engineer, mention of his name or even firing from whoever he worked for.
If PE's don't get penalized the whole game is worthless. I never heard of or saw any letters to the newspapers from other PE's wanting to establish the identity of the bad engineer.
Also, locally, I have heard several stories of PE's designing bad house foundations.
Not impressed. And that bit about having to have worked for PE's in the same field is just about impossible for an ME.
PE protectionist laws = legalized racketeering
I thought getting my PE was a good thing to do... that it would help promote good engineering and show employers that I had the skills and commitment they desired. After becoming a PE and learning about the extensive lobbying for protectionist legislation and the never ending regulations (with corresponding fees) I have come to realize that the PE pushers simply want total control over who can compete for business. The more restrictions and obstacle placed in the way, the fewer people will compete for the work. Plus, most state laws have been crafted such that anyone (regardless of how well qualified they are) who doesn't "join the club" - (there is a separate club for EACH and EVERY state), will be facing civil fines ($1000 and up), and possible criminal charges. EACH STATE requires $200-$300 in application and registration fees, often due every 2 years. Double the fees if you own an engineering firm. The PE designation/legislation is simply a very expensive and time consuming protectionist club. If I didn't have a family to feed, I would be taking up the legal fight too.
PE licensing
After following the many insightful MD letters on the continuing PE controversy, it’s time I put in my own two cents:
In over 40 years, I’ve worked in dozens of engineering disciplines designing mechanical, electrical, electronic & fluidic components, systems & subsystems including agricultural, automotive, aeronautical, medical, microwave, military, material-handling, industrial & commercial. But, always too busy working and/or raising a family, I’ve never had (or made?) the time to finish my degree, although I have over 125 engineering-related units at 4 colleges/universities.
I did get my EIT license in 1988 & had intended to work on getting my PE, but still haven’t. The requirements really are geared toward civil engineering, which is not my bailiwick -- although I once aced the CAL-Trans engineering exam when applying for a position there, ca. 1982. And the requirement that the applicant work under a PE for a number of years is almost impossible to attain for most mechanical-electronic-fluidic engineers.
I’ve managed people & projects, authored papers & taught others to excel on various CAD platforms, invented & implemented a plethora of parts, assemblies & systems. I’m proud of my professionalism, inventiveness, efficiency & resulting work product. I’ve never had any of “my” components or systems fail, break, hurt anybody, or do anything other than their design intent.
I have been successfully operating independently now for 7 years, but I can’t use the word “engineer” in my business name. There’s definitely something wrong with that.
Brian A Lentz
Leave a comment